Final Draft
City of Salinas
Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
City of Salinas
Final Draft Sanitary Sewer
Master Plan Update
April 2023
Submitted by:
201 John Street. STE H
Salinas, CALIFORNIA 93901
T 831 772-5260
www.wallacegroup.us
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
In accordance with the provisions of Section 6735 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California, this report was prepared by or under the direction of the following Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of California:
ENGINEER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE:
_______ _____________________________________________________________________ Kari Wagner, PE C66026 Expiration: 6/30/2024 Date
DRAFT FOR REVIEW
Page i
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW .................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................................................ 1-1 Task 1. Document Review and Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 1-1 Task 2. Field Effort & GIS Update ....................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Task 3. Wastewater Flow Characteristics and Projections ................................................................................................ 1-2 Task 4. Develop and Calibrate Sewer Model ..................................................................................................................... 1-2 Task 5. Develop Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................................ 1-3 Task 6. Develop Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................................ 1-3 Task 7. Draft and Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update ............................................................................................. 1-3 C H A P T E R 2 L A N D U S E A N D P O P U L A T I O N ................................................................................................ 2-1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Existing Wastewater Service Area ..................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Study Area ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 LAND USE............................................................................................................................................................................... 2-2 Land Use: Existing Wastewater Service Area..................................................................................................................... 2-2 Study Area: Future Land Use ............................................................................................................................................. 2-3 POPULATION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2-7 Existing Population ............................................................................................................................................................ 2-7 Population Densities .......................................................................................................................................................... 2-7 Future Population .............................................................................................................................................................. 2-8 C H A P T E R 3 C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M O V E R V I E W ........................................................................................ 3-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Gravity Sewer Mains .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Manholes .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Lift Stations ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3-3 Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) ..................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Inverted Siphons ................................................................................................................................................................ 3-4 Industrial Wastewater Diversion ....................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Reclamation Ditch Diversion .............................................................................................................................................. 3-4 HIGH PRIORITY AREAS ........................................................................................................................................................... 3-5 City Manhole Monitors ...................................................................................................................................................... 3-5 2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation ................................................................................................................................. 3-7 O&M Repairs ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3-7 C H A P T E R 4 W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S ................................................................................................................ 4-1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4-1 WASTEWATER FLOW MONITORING ...................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Flow Meters ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Flow Monitoring Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 4-2 SALINAS AREA PUMP STATION AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS ........................................................................................................ 4-5 WATER USE DATA .................................................................................................................................................................. 4-6 EXISTING WASTEWATER FLOWS ........................................................................................................................................... 4-6 PEAKING FACTOR ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Average Daily Flow (ADF) .................................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Page ii
Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow (MDDWF)..................................................................................................................... 4-9 Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow (PHDWF) ............................................................................................................................. 4-9 Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow (PHWWF) .......................................................................................................................... 4-9 INFILTRATION AND INFLOW ................................................................................................................................................ 4-10 Historical Rainfall Dependent Infiltration and Inflow ...................................................................................................... 4-10 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan RDII Peak Unit Flow Rates ......................................................................................... 4-11 FUTURE WASTEWATER FLOWS ........................................................................................................................................... 4-13 C H A P T E R 5 L I F T S T A T I O N E V A L U A T I O N ................................................................................................... 5-1 LIFT STATION BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 5-1 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 5-3 Airport (Moffett) Lift Station.............................................................................................................................................. 5-3 Carpenter Hall Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................. 5-4 De La Torre Lift Station ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-4 Harkins Road Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................... 5-5 Lake Street Lift Station ....................................................................................................................................................... 5-5 Las Casitas Lift Station ....................................................................................................................................................... 5-6 Mill Lake Lift Station .......................................................................................................................................................... 5-6 Santa Rita Lift Station ........................................................................................................................................................ 5-7 Spicer Lift Station ............................................................................................................................................................... 5-7 TP2 Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................................... 5-8 Vista Nueva Lift Station ..................................................................................................................................................... 5-8 Harris Road Lift Station ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-9 HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION – EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................... 5-10 Force Main Hydraulic Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................... 5-10 Existing Lift Station Inflow ............................................................................................................................................... 5-13 Pumping Capacity Evaluation .......................................................................................................................................... 5-13 Wet Well Capacity Evaluation ......................................................................................................................................... 5-16 Emergency Response Time Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 5-21 HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - FUTURE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................... 5-26 Future Wastewater Flows and Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 5-26 Airport (Moffett) Lift Station............................................................................................................................................ 5-26 Carpenter Hall Lift Station ............................................................................................................................................... 5-26 De La Torre Lift Station .................................................................................................................................................... 5-26 Harkins Road Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................. 5-27 Lake Street Lift Station ..................................................................................................................................................... 5-27 Las Casitas Lift Station ..................................................................................................................................................... 5-27 Mill Lake Lift Station ........................................................................................................................................................ 5-27 Santa Rita Lift Station ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-27 Spicer Lift Station ............................................................................................................................................................. 5-28 TP2 Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................................. 5-29 Vista Nueva Lift Station ................................................................................................................................................... 5-29 SITE INVESTIGATION SUMMARY & OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 5-31 Airport (Moffett) .............................................................................................................................................................. 5-32 Carpenter Hall .................................................................................................................................................................. 5-33 De La Torre....................................................................................................................................................................... 5-34 Harkins Road .................................................................................................................................................................... 5-35 Lake Street ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5-36 Las Casitas ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5-37 Mill Lake ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5-38 Santa Rita ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5-39 Spicer ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5-40 TP2 ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5-41 Page iii
Vista Nueva ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5-42 C H A P T E R 6 C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M A N A L Y S I S .......................................................................................... 6-1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM ANALYSIS CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................. 6-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................................... 6-2 Flow Allocation .................................................................................................................................................................. 6-2 Model Calibration .............................................................................................................................................................. 6-3 System Conditions Analyzed .............................................................................................................................................. 6-3 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL RESULTS – EXISTING FLOW CONDITIONS ............................................................................... 6-4 Deficient System Capacity.................................................................................................................................................. 6-4 Low Pipe Velocity ............................................................................................................................................................... 6-7 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL RESULTS – FUTURE FLOW CONDITIONS ................................................................................. 6-7 Deficient System Capacity.................................................................................................................................................. 6-7 C H A P T E R 7 C A P I T A L I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M................................................................................... 7-1 BASIS OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS ........................................................................................................... 7-1 Sewer Main Upgrade Unit Costs ........................................................................................................................................ 7-1 CIP RANKING.......................................................................................................................................................................... 7-3 Lift Station CIPs .................................................................................................................................................................. 7-3 TIMING OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS...................................................................................................................... 7-4
A P P E N D I C E S
APPENDIX A: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT TABLES
APPENDIX B: 2017 MARK THOMAS CCTV SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS APPENDIX C: CITY SEWER REPAIR ATLAS MAP
APPENDIX D: LIFT STATION PUMP CURVES
APPENDIX E: FRM LIFT STATION CONDITION ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX F: EXHIBIT 1 EXISTING AND FUTURE CIPS
APPENDIX G: SEWER MODEL RESULTS
Page iv
L I S T O F T A B L E S
TABLE 2-1 CITY EXISTING LAND USE .......................................................................................................................... 2-2 TABLE 2-2. COUNTY BORONDA AREA EXISTING LAND USE ....................................................................................... 2-3 TABLE 2-3 SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ................................................................................................ 2-5 TABLE 2-4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ........................................................................................................... 2-6 Table 2-5. RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES ............................................................................................................................ 2-7 TABLE 3-1. GRAVITY SEWER INVENTORY BY DIAMETER ............................................................................................ 3-2 TABLE 3-2. MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS ..................................................................................................... 3-6 TABLE 3-3. PACP AND MACP GRADING TABLE .......................................................................................................... 3-7 TABLE 3-4. O&M REPAIRS .......................................................................................................................................... 3-8 TABLE 3-5. CCTV COSTS ........................................................................................................................................... 3-10 TABLE 3-6. ANNUAL CCTV PROGRAM ...................................................................................................................... 3-10 TABLE 4-1. FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 4-3 TABLE 4-2. SAPS DOMESTIC WASTEWATER FLOWS .................................................................................................. 4-5 TABLE 4-3. WATER USE .............................................................................................................................................. 4-6 TABLE 4-4. EXISTING FLOW FACTORS ........................................................................................................................ 4-6 TABLE 4-5. EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS BY SEWERSHED ................................................................................. 4-7 TABLE 4-6. EXISTING FLOW FACTORS ........................................................................................................................ 4-7 TABLE 4-7. PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW FOR 10-YEAR, 6-HOUR STORM ................................................................. 4-12 TABLE 4-8. ADDITIONAL FUTURE AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS BY GROWTH AREA ....................................................... 4-13 TABLE 4-9. EXISTING AND FUTURE FLOW SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 4-13 Table 5-1. LIFT STATION SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 5-2 TABLE 5-2. FORCE MAIN EVALUATION SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 5-12 TABLE 5-3. EXISTING LIFT STATION INFLOW BY LAND USE ...................................................................................... 5-14 TABLE 5-4. LIFT STATION FLOW COMPARISON SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 5-15 TABLE 5-5. WET WELL CYCLE TIMES ........................................................................................................................ 5-20 TABLE 5-6. LIFT STATION EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES ....................................................................................... 5-25 TABLE 5-7. LIFT STATION FUTURE FLOW SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 5-30 TABLE 5-8. SUMMARY OF LIFT STATION UPGRADES BASED UPON VISUAL INSPECTION ........................................ 5-31 TABLE 6-1. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA FOR EXISTING SYSTEMS ........................................................................................ 6-2 TABLE 7-1. SEWER MAIN CONSTRUCTION UPGRADE UNIT COSTS ............................................................................ 7-2 TABLE 7-2. EXISTING HYDRAULIC AND MAINTENANCE REPAIR CIP RANKING MATRIX ............................................. 7-5 TABLE 7-3. EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP RANKING MATRIX ........................................................................................ 7-7 TABLE 7-4. CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) .................................................... 7-8 TABLE 7-5. CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING LIFT STATIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) ......................... 7-12 TABLE 7-6. CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) .................................................... 7-13
Page v
L I S T O F F I G U R ES
FIGURE 2-1: EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................ 2-9 FIGURE 2-2: EXISTING LAND USE ............................................................................................................................. 2-10 FIGURE 2-3: CITY GROWTH AREAS........................................................................................................................... 2-11 FIGURE 2-4: FOCUSED GROWTH AREAS LAND USE ................................................................................................. 2-12 FIGURE 2-5: FUTURE GROWTH AREAS LAND USE ................................................................................................... 2-13 FIGURE 2-6: NORTH BORONDA FGA SPECIFIC PLANS .............................................................................................. 2-14 FIGURE 3-1: EXISTING PIPE DIAMETER FIGURE 3-2: BRICK MANHOLES & FLUSHING INLETS ................................. 3-11 FIGURE 3-3: LIFT STATIONS AND SIPHONS .............................................................................................................. 3-13 FIGURE 3-4: CITY MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS ......................................................................................... 3-14 FIGURE 3-5: CCTV ANALYSIS FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 3-15 FIGURE 4-1: FLOW MONITORING LOCATIONS & SEWERSHEDS .............................................................................. 4-15 FIGURE 4-2: POPULATION DENSITY HEATMAP ........................................................................................................ 4-16 FIGURE 4-3: DIURNAL CURVES................................................................................................................................. 4-17 FIGURE 4-4: SEWERSHED 1 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-18 FIGURE 4-5: SEWERSHED 2 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-19 FIGURE 4-6: SEWERSHED 3 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-20 FIGURE 4-7: SEWERSHED 4 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-21 FIGURE 4-8: SEWERSHED 5 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-22 FIGURE 4-9: SEWERSHED 6 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-23 FIGURE 4-10: SEWERSHED 7 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-24 FIGURE 4-11: SEWERSHED 8 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-25 FIGURE 4-12: SEWERSHED 9 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-26 FIGURE 4-13: SEWERSHED 10 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-27 FIGURE 4-14: SEWERSHED 11 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-28 FIGURE 4-15: SEWERSHED 12 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-29 FIGURE 4-16: SEWERSHED 13 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-30 FIGURE 4-17: SEWERSHED 14 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-31 FIGURE 4-18: SEWERSHED 15 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-32 FIGURE 4-19: SEWERSHED 16 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-33 FIGURE 4-20: SEWERSHED 17 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-34 FIGURE 4-21: SEWERSHED 18 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-35 FIGURE 4-22: FEBRUARY 2017 DRY WEATHER VS WET WEATHER FLOW ............................................................... 4-36 FIGURE 5-1: EXISTING LIFT STATION TRIBUTARY AREA MAP .................................................................................. 5-43 FIGURE 5-2: FUTURE LIFT STATION TRIBUTARY AREA MAP .................................................................................... 5-44 FIGURE 6-1: WASTEWATER MODEL OVERVIEW MAP ............................................................................................. 6-10 FIGURE 6-2: FUTURE FLOW ALLOCATIONS .............................................................................................................. 6-11 FIGURE 6-3: EXISTING CAPACITY DURING PEAK CONDITIONS................................................................................. 6-12 FIGURE 6-4: EXISTING SEWER UPGRADES ............................................................................................................... 6-13 FIGURE 6-5: LOW PIPE VELOCITIES DURING ADF .................................................................................................... 6-14 FIGURE 6-6: FUTURE CAPACITY DURING PEAK CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 6-15 FIGURE 6-7: FUTURE PIPE UPGRADES ..................................................................................................................... 6-16 FIGURE 7-1 EXISTING CIP: CESAR CHAVEZ PARK...................................................................................................... 7-15 FIGURE 7-2 EXISTING CIP: UPSTREAM TP2 DIVERSION ........................................................................................... 7-16 FIGURE 7-3 EXISTING CIP: NORTHRIDGE MALL ....................................................................................................... 7-17 FIGURE 7-4 EXISTING CIP: CHEROKEE DRIVE ........................................................................................................... 7-18 FIGURE 7-5 EXISTING CIP: NOICE DRIVE/TYLER STREET .......................................................................................... 7-19 FIGURE 7-6 EXISTING CIP: NATIVIDAD ROAD OR ALTERNATIVE NATIVIDAD CONSOLIDATION ............................... 7-20 FIGURE 7-7 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): LAKE STREET LIFT STATION .............................................................. 7-21 FIGURE 7-8 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): SANTA RITA LIFT STATION ................................................................ 7-22 FIGURE 7-9 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): SPICER LIFT STATION ........................................................................ 7-23 Page vi
FIGURE 7-10 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): MILL LAKE LIFT STATION ................................................................ 7-24 FIGURE 7-11 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): CARPENTER HALL LIFT STATION ..................................................... 7-25 FIGURE 7-12 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): DE LA TORRE LIFT STATION ............................................................ 7-26 FIGURE 7-13 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): VISTA NUEVA LIFT STATION ........................................................... 7-27 FIGURE 7-14 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): HARKINS LIFT STATION ................................................................... 7-28 FIGURE 7-15 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): LAS CASITAS LIFT STATION ............................................................. 7-29 FIGURE 7-16 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2 LIFT STATION ........................................................................... 7-30 FIGURE 7-17 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): AIRPORT LIFT STATION ................................................................... 7-31 FIGURE 7-18 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): CONTROLLER UPGRADES AND STANDARDIZATION .............................. 7-32 FIGURE 7-19 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): INSTALL EMERGENCY BYPASS AND WASHDOWN WATER .................... 7-33 FIGURE 7-20 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): SAFETY/FALLING HAZARD CONCERN ..................................................... 7-34 FIGURE 7-21 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): GENERATOR REPLACEMENT .................................................................. 7-35 FIGURE 7-22 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): ONSITE STANDBY GENERATOR .............................................................. 7-36 FIGURE 7-23 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): POWER RECEPTACLE ............................................................................. 7-37 FIGURE 7-24 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): PAINTING/COATING MAINTENANCE ..................................................... 7-38 FIGURE 7-25 FUTURE CIP: SAN JUAN GRADE........................................................................................................... 7-39 FIGURE 7-26 FUTURE CIP: NORTH DAVIS ROAD ...................................................................................................... 7-40 FIGURE 7-27 FUTURE CIP: WEST LAUREL DRIVE ...................................................................................................... 7-41 FIGURE 7-28 FUTURE CIP: VICTOR STREET .............................................................................................................. 7-42 FIGURE 7-29 FUTURE CIP: FREEDOM PARKWAY ..................................................................................................... 7-43 FIGURE 7-30 FUTURE CIP: NATIVIDAD CREEK PARK ................................................................................................ 7-44 FIGURE 7-31 FUTURE CIP: EAST ALISAL STREET ....................................................................................................... 7-45 FIGURE 7-32 FUTURE CIP: ABBOTT STREET ............................................................................................................. 7-46 FIGURE 7-33 FUTURE CIP: SOUTH SANBORN ROAD ................................................................................................ 7-47
Page vii
L I S T O F A C R O N Y M S
ABS Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
ADF Average Daily Flow
AMBAG Association of Monterey Bay Area Government
CASP Central Area Specific Plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
cfs Cubic feet per second
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System CIP Capital Improvements Project
City City of Salinas
CIWQS California Integrated Water Quality System Project County Monterey County
d/D Depth over Diameter
DOF Department of Finance
du/ac Dwelling Units per Acreage
EDE Economic Development Element
E.I.T. Engineer in Training
EIR Environmental Impact Reports
ENR Engineering New Record
ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute
FAR Floor Area Ratio
FGA Future Growth Area
FOG Fats, Oils, and Grease
FPS Feet per Second
FRM Fluid Resource Management
Ft Feet
Ft/Sec Feet per Second
GIS Geographic Information System
GISP Geographic Information System Professional
gpapd Gallons per acre per day
GPD Gallons Per Day
GPM Gallons Per Minute
HDPE High Density Polyethylene
I/I Infiltration and Inflow
IWCCS Industrial Waste Water Collection and Conveyance System LAFCO Monterey County Local Area Formation Commission
LF Linear Feet
MACP Manhole Assessment and Certification Program
MDDWF Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow
MGD Million Gallons Per Day
min Minute
MRWPCA Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency M1W Monterey One Water
NA Not Applicable
NAD North American Datum
NASSCO National Association of Sewer Service Companies
Page viii
NAVD North American Vertical Datum
ND Negative Declarations
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PACP Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program
P.E. Professional Engineer
P.L.S. Professional Land Surveyor
PF Peaking Factor
PHDWF Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow
PHWWF Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride
RDII Rainfall-Dependent Infiltration and Inflow
RDWWTP Regional Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant
SAPS Salinas Area Pump Station
S.F. Square Foot
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SSMPU Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
US3 USCubed
VCP Vitrified Clay Pipe
VFD Variable Frequency Drive
WASP West Area Specific Plan
w/ With
1-1
C H AP T E R 1
I N T ROD UC T IO N
This report presents the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (SSMPU) for the City of Salinas (City). Preparation of the SSMPU will assist the City of Salinas in prioritizing both existing and future collection system needs through repair, rehabilitation, replacement, or new facilities.
E N V I R O N M E N T A L R E V I E W
In accordance with Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 18 (Statutory Exemptions), this SSMPU is considered a planning study and therefore adoption of this document is exempt from the requirements to prepare Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) or Negative Declarations (ND). However, on a project -specific basis, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) must be sat isfied for any major capital improvement projects described in this report that will be implemented by the City in the future, through the preparation of an appropriate EIR or ND.
A U T H O R I Z A T I O N A N D S C O P E O F W O R K In March 2021, the City authorized Wallace Group to prepare a comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. The scope of work is as follows:
Task 1. Document Review and Data Collection
We will review the existing 2011 Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan and City documents, including but not limited to the Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP), the Sewer Rate Study, the Salinas General Plan, and the Economic Development Element. Data collection will include review of the City’s sanitary sewer records, future development plans, CCTV inspection videos, and maintenance records.
Task 2. Field Effort & GIS Update
Task 2.1 Survey Sanitary Sewer Manholes
Wallace Group, in conjunction with Fluid Resource Wallace Group will survey the rim elevations of each sewer manhole to be modeled (based on 1,025 manholes) and dip the manhole to obtain the invert elevation (invert in and invert out) of the flow lines. Wallace Group will also take pictures of each of the manholes, which would then be included in the GIS database. Based on photos and visual observation from ground surface, we will ascertain pipe material.
Task 2.2 Lift Station Assessment
Wallace Group, in conjunction with Fluid Resource Management (FRM), will conduct evaluations of the City’s eleven lift stations. FRM will provide a Cal-OSHA confined space entry permit, and perform such confined space entry to evaluate the wet well for visible signs of corrosion and “wear and tear”, and will make recommen dations if a structural investigation of the wet well is warranted based on observation. We will evaluate the condition of piping and internal components, document the size of the wet well/pumping station, approximate depth and size of inverts, perform a p ump draw down test and determine approximate flow from each pump, perform full load amperage and Meg-ohm readings on each motor, verify automation of controls, evaluate the electrical system for possible deficiencies/code violations, document the pumps and motors make/model 1-2
number, pull and inspect the pumps for signs of wear and tear including inspecting pump seals and fittings, electrical components for code violations, evaluate the pump seals, fittings, and overall condition, and perform a pump test to determine approximate flow, and measure amperage/power draws to check for signs of pump motor concerns. We will evaluate the system’s ability to meet existing and future demands based on the pumping capacity and will provide the City with lift station upgrade recommendations.
Task 2.3 In -Line Flow Monitoring
Wallace Group will develop a flow monitoring program (FMP) in support of calibrating the hydraulic model of the sanitary sewer system. The flow data will evaluate average flow rates and representative diurnal flow patterns throughout the City including in/out of all pump stations, and to assist in the review/identification of average flow rates for residential (single and multi-family), commercial, hotel/motel, and apartment land uses.
As part of the FMP, we will work with US3 to review site conditions of the potential monitoring sites, assuring they are hydraulically suitable for accurate flow monitoring measurements. The FMP is based on an assumed total number of 16 monitoring stations, with a total duration of 60 calendar days at each location. It is envisioned the winter monitoring will extend 45 calendar days, and the dry weather monitoring will extend 15 calendar days.
Task 2.4 Update GIS Database
Based on data collected, Wallace Gro up will update the City’s GIS database. Wallace Group will also utilize data collected to incorporate any new developments and upgraded sewer mains that are not already included in the GIS database.
Task 3. Wastewater Flow Characteristics and Projections We will develop unit flow factors in order to better project wastewater flows from future developments and calibrate the sewer model using existing wastewater flows. These unit factors will be developed for development types including residential, multi-family, commercial, industrial, hotels and other factors. We will request from Cal Water, water meter records/bills that will be used to evaluate usage from the various types of developments.
Using actual water use data will provide the most accurate project ion of wastewater generation unit factors, especially for residential and hotel units. Water demand data will be evaluated for a minimum of 12 months in order to assess indoor water demands (which generate wastewater flows) versus outdoor water demands (which do not generate wastewater flows). We will also use population and density information from the City’s General Plan, Specific Plans, and other planning documents provided by the City, to project future build -out (15 -year planning horizon) population and wastewater flows. We will compile all the information reviewed and gathered under Tasks 1, 2, and 3 and prepare a Preliminary Findings Memorandum stating our findings.
Task 4. Develop and Calibrate Sewer Model
We will utilize survey data collected in Task 1 and 2, and the updated GIS database for use in the Innovyze sewer modeling program (InfoSWMM). We will model the collection system under dry and wet weather conditions for the existing and future loadings. We typically will only model the trunk sewer mains (typically 10-inch and larger), with some exceptions. Using flow data collected in the Field Investigations, we will model simulations for dry and wet weather flow conditions for existing and future (build -out) development scenarios. W e will use the model results to identify locations in the wastewater system that have hydraulic capacity constraints under existing and future flow conditions, peak dry weather and wet weather flow conditions, based on the criteria developed for the 2011 report. Based on the flow monitoring data obtained, we will provide the City with general observations 1-3
of tributary areas exhibiting signs of I/I. Based on this observation, we will recommend areas for further I/I investigation.
Task 5. Develop Capital Imp rovement Program
Using data collected during Field Investigations, and the modeling efforts of Task 4, we will develop a Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program (CIP) recommending short -term (5-year) and long -term (15-year) improvements necessary to maintain a desired level of service for the City’s sanitary sewer assets such as mainlines, manholes, and pump stations. We will also provide one additional Program focused on Development induced improvement recommendations. These upgrades are required to be completed when development occurs, which the timing may not be known.
Task 6. Develop Capital Improvement Program
Wallace Group will team with DTA to complete a Sanitary Sewer Development Impact Fee Nexus Study.
This Task will not start until after the completion of Task 7. This Study will be completed under separate cover.
Task 7. Draft and Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update Upon completion of Tasks 1-5, we will submit five (5) printed copies and 1 digital copy in pdf format of a draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan report to the City for review and comment.
Upon receiving written comments from the City for the draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan report and discussion at the City Council, Wallace Group will prepare the Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update.
1-4
A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
The City of Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (SSMPU) is prepared by Wallace Group on behalf of the City of Salinas. Wallace Group gratefully acknowledges the City of Salinas, Monterey One Water, Utility System Science & Software (US3), and Fluid Resource Management (FRM) for their efforts, involvement, and assistance in preparing the City of Salinas SSMPU.
City of Salinas
Adriana Robles, P.E., City Engineer
Brian Frus, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Gary Gabriel, Wastewater Manager
Ray Lerma, Maintenance Supervisor
Doyle McFarland, Pump Mechanic
Monterey One Water
Jennifer Gonzalez, P.E., Engineering Manager
Alison Imamura, P.E., Principal Engineer
Utility System Science & Software (US3)
Darlene Szczublewski, P.E., Project Engineer
Cari Campbell, Engineer
Fluid Resource Management (FRM)
Mike Ellison
Jason Molinari
The City of Salinas SSMPU was completed with the efforts of many Wallace Group team members. They include:
Kari Wagner, P.E., Principal/Director of Water Resources Rick Riedl, P.E., Principal Engineer
Steve Tanaka, P.E., Principal Engineer
Valerie Huff, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Andrea Kingsbury, P.E., Civil Engineer
Alexandra Cass, E.I.T, Associate Engineer
2-1
C H AP T E R 2
L A ND US E AN D P OP U L ATI O N
This Chapter presents the land use and existing and future population forecasts for the City’s SSMPU study area.
The purpose of establishing the existing population and land use is to better understand the existing wastewater flow characteristics throughout the City’s collection system, which provides a framework to forecast the wastewater flows that may be contributed in the future by vacant or under-utilized land. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.
I N T R O D U C T I O N
The City of Salinas is the largest city in Monterey County and serves as the County seat. The City has a long heritage as the financial and industrial center of Monterey County. US Route 101 bisects the City, while California State Route 68 heads west to Monterey and California State Route 183 runs northwest to Castroville. The City was incorporated in 1874 and is known as the “Salad Bowl of the World” for its large agricultural industry.
Existing Wastewater Service Area
The City’s current wastewater service boundary incorporates approximately 12,455 acres. Sewer facilities within the existing service area are owned and operated by the City. Bolsa Knolls is a rural neighborhood just outside of City limits. There is a small portion of Bolsa Knolls near Rogge Road that is also served by the City through a special assessment district. The remaining area of Bolsa Knolls is planned for future connection to the City’s collection system.
Study Area
One major purpose of this SSMPU is to evaluate the impacts that potential developments and future growth areas will have on the sewer collection system. The sphere of influence is defined as the territory outside the city limits which the Monterey County L ocal Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) recognizes as the appropriate and probable future jurisdictional boundary and service area of the City. Figure 2 -1 displays City limits, the existing service area, and the SSMPU Study Area.
The study area for this SSMPU includes this sphere of influence, including the following areas:
❖ Future Growth Areas (FGA) include the North Boronda FGA, East FGA, Southeast FGA, and West Boronda FGA
❖ Target Areas, as identified by City’s Economic Development Element (EDE)
❖ County Boronda Area is currently tied to the City’s collection system, however, the sewer facilities are owned and operated by Monterey County
❖ Bolsa Knolls is an area in the County planned for future connection to the City’s collection system
❖ Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
2-2
L A N D U S E
The following sections discuss the existing and future land uses within the study area. The existing land uses are based on the City’s GIS database and General Plan Land Use Map.
Land Use: Existing Wastewater Service Area
The City is comprised of 12,455 acres of land, zoned for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and public facilities. Table 2-1 summarizes the different land uses in the City’s boundary and includes the special assessment district in Bolsa Knolls since it is part of the City’s existing service area. Land use data shown on Figure 2 -2 is a combination of GIS data provided by the City and the General Plan Land Use Map.
T A B L E 2 - 1 C I T Y E X I S T I N G L A N D U S E
N U M B E R
O F
P A R C E L S
A R E A
( A C R E S )
% O F S E R V I C E
A R E A
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 18,253 3,003 24.1% M E D I U M D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 6,906 929 7.5% H I G H D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 2,007 635 5.1% M O B I L E H O M E 9 116 0.9%
C O M M E R C I A L 1,397 1,297 10.4%
I N D U S T R I A L 306 814 6.5%
H O T E L 34 34 0.3%
S C H O O L 59 752 6.0%
P U B L I C / S E M I- P U B L I C 232 1,294 10.4%
O P E N S P A C E 4 31 0.2%
A G R I C U L T U R E 51 3,261 26.2%
V A C A N T 324 289 2.3%
T O T A L 29,482 12,455 100%
2-3
As discussed, the County Boronda Area flows into the City’s collection system. Table 2-2 breaks down the land use for the County Boronda Area, also shown on Figure 2-2.
T A B L E 2 - 2 . C O U N T Y B O R O N D A A R E A E X I S T I N G L A N D U S E
N u m b e r o f
P a r c e l s
A r e a
( A c r e s )
C O M M E R C I A L 35 63
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 358 111
H O T E L 2 7
O P E N S P A C E 1 1
S C H O O L 1 6
P U B L I C / S E M I- P U B L I C 7 4
T O T A L 404 192
Study Area: Future Land Use
One major purpose of the SSMPU is to forecast the wastewater flows that will be contributed by growth areas in the future, both within and outside City limits. Both the City’s General Plan and Economic Development Element (EDE) were used as the sources to evaluate future land use and development capacity. The EDE is the most recent document, dated September 2017, and is the eighth element of the 2002 City’s General Plan. The EDE provides amendments to the City’s General Plan that reflects the goals, policies, and actions outlined in the EDE. Table LU- 3 of the Proposed General Plan Amendments (attached in Appendix A) was used to project future dwelling units and non-residential building capacities for the City’s focused growth area s and future growth areas. Additional development capacities, known as Target Areas, are identified in Table LU -ED-1 (attached in Appendix A).
Although most of these Target Areas fall outside the City boundary, they are included in the SSMPU study area.
Focused Growth Areas, Future Growth Areas, and Target Areas are shown on Figure 2-3.
The development capacities found in the General Plan and the EDE provide the most conservative projections for City buildout in the Year 2045. However, it is importan t to note that these numbers are based on planning projections and preliminary locations around the City. As future developments enter final engineering and design, it is recommended that the City re -evaluate the sewer model based on more accurate flow pro jections, engineering plans, and sewer main tie-in locations.
Focused Growth Areas
The General Plan identifies (5) Focused Growth Areas to accommodate new developments. The Focused Growth Areas are:
❖ Laurel Drive at North Main Street
❖ North Main Street/Soledad Street
❖ East Alisal Street/East Market Street
❖ Abbott Street
❖ South Main Street
2-4
According to the General Plan, these areas of existing developments would “benefit from redevelopment or revitalization, change of land uses, and/or the incorporation of mixed -use residential uses.” Wastewater flows for these focused growth areas will be modeled based on the future land use designation; however, the impact to the City’s collection system is likely marginal since most focused growth areas already contribute existing wastewater flows. Additional modeling may be necessary in the event more intensification of use, such as a hotel, is incorporated. These Focused Growth Areas and the future land uses per the City’s General Plan are shown on Figure 2-4.
Bolsa Knolls Septic Conversion
As discussed, a small portion of the Bolsa Knolls are a is currently served by the City through a special assessment district. The remaining Bolsa Knolls area is on septic tanks. As part of the future analysis for this SSMPU, this remaining Bolsa Knolls area is included in the hydraulic model as a future connection to the City’s collection system.
Future Growth Areas
Four (4) Future Growth areas (FGA) were identified in the City’s General Plans as areas outside the City limits where new growth will occur on land that is currently used for agricultural production. The Future Growth Areas are:
❖ North Boronda FGA
❖ East FGA
❖ Southeast FGA
❖ West Boronda FGA
The Future Growth Areas and future land uses associated per the City’s General Plan are shown on Figure 2-5. In 2008, the North Boronda FGA was annexed into the City. Prior to development, Future Growth Areas are subject to the adoption of Specific Plans by the City Council. The North Boronda FGA was split into three (3) Specific Plans: West Area, Central Area, and East Area, shown on Figure 2 -6. In December 2019, the West Area Specific Plan (WASP) was approved by City Council, and in 2020, the Draft Central Area Specific Plan (CASP) was made public for review. Table 2-3 summarizes the development capacities identified in the WASP and CASP. The East Area Specific Plan has not been made public and is not included in Table 2 -3. These Plans specify the ultimate distribution, location, and intensity of land uses. Unsewered areas such as open space and parks are not included in this table as they do not contribute wastewater base flow.
2-5
T A B L E 2 - 3 S P E C I F I C P L A N D E V E L O P M E N T C A P A C I T Y
W E S T A R E A C E N T R A L A R E A
D W E L L I N G
U N I T S
N O N-
R E S I D E N T I A L
( S F )
D W E L L I N G
U N I T S
N O N-
R E S I D E N T I A L
( S F )
L O W D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,361
–
1,367
–
M E D I U M
D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,803
–
1,359
–
H I G H D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,085
–
1,185
–
C O M M E R C I A L /
M I X E D U S E 91 571,500
–
489,700
T O T A L 4,340 571,500 3,911 489,700
Salinas Ag -Industrial Center
The Salinas Ag -Industrial Center, within City limits, is a 257 -acre area planned for agricultural - related businesses. Ruggeri -Jensen-Azar and Associates prepared the Sanitary Sewer System Analysis Report & Calculations for the Salinas -Ag Industrial Center, dated November 2021. The proposed sewer system will connect to the City’s existing system at Abbott Street, Burton Avenue, and Dayton Street. Projected square footage of these industrial buildings is based on the average floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.3 for general industrial land uses, as identified in Table LU-3 of the City’s General Plan.
Target Areas
With the adoption of the EDE, the City amended the General Plan to include Economic Opportunity Target Areas to provide additional land capacity for new economic development. Five of the six Target Areas are currently outside of the City’s Sphere of Influence but have been included in the SSMPU study area to account for future wastewater flows. The sixth target area, Target Area V, shown on Figure 2-3, is within Carr Lake, inside City limits. Table LU-ED-1 (attached in Appendix A) summarizes the land use and building capacities for these Target Areas.
Table 2-4 summarizes the total projected dwelling units and projected non-residential area, as shown in Table LU- 3 of the proposed General Plan amendments. These numbers include the units identified in the CASP and WASP.
The land uses and development capacities for the Target Areas are also shown on Table 2-4. Inaccurate totals for Focused Growth Area acres, Future Growth Area acres, and Future Growth Area projected non-residential square feet were corrected on Table LU -3 in Appendix A. The City’s General Plan land u se areas in GIS were used to allocate projected dwelling units and non-residential areas to the Focused Growth Area and Future Growth Areas.
The GIS areas did not match the projected areas, so a multiplier was used to scale the GIS areas to match each designated land use shown in Table 2-4.
2-6
T A B L E 2 - 4 . F U T U R E D E V E L O P M E N T C A P A C I T Y
A C R E S
P R O J E C T E D
D W E L L I N G U N I T S P R O J E C T E D N O N - R E S I D E N T I A L ( S F )
L A N D
U S E
F O C U S E D
G R O W T H
A R E A
F U T U R E
G R O W T H
A R E A
T A R G E T
A R E A S
S A L I N A S A G -
I N D U S T R I A L
C E N T E R
F O C U S E D
G R O W T H
A R E A
F U T U R E
G R O W T H
A R E A
F O C U S E D
G R O W T H
A R E A
F U T U R E
G R O W T H
A R E A
T A R G E T
A R E A S
S A L I N A S A G -
I N D U S T R I A L
C E N T E R
O P E N S P A C E 4 696 -- -- 0 0 5,000 420,000 -- --
L O W D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L
9 1,042 -- -- 57 6,771 0 0 -- --
M E D I U M
D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L
43 515 -- -- 507 6,052 0 0 -- --
H I G H D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L
9 160 -- -- 153 2,680 0 0 -- --
C O M M E R C I A L 148 183 201 -- 0 9 4,361,000 208,000 2,193,478 -- M I X E D U S E 212 120 -- -- 989 360 10,891,000 2,613,000 -- -- I N D U S T R I A L 73 995 218 257 0 0 950,000 10,773,000 3,073,158 3,3 61,743
P U B L I C /
S E M I - P U B L I C
58 247 -- -- 0 0 636,000 2,799,000 -- --
T O T A L 556 3,958 419 257 1,706 15,872 16,843,000 16,813,00 0 5,266,636 3,361,743 2-7
P O P U L A T I O N
Population for the SSCSMP is comprised of the City population within the study area. Three sources of information were utilized to determine existing and future population for the study area:
1. 2015 City of Salinas Housing Element
2. 2020 Census
3. Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) Final 2020 Regional Growth Forecast Memorandum
Existing Popula tion
The City’s existing population and historic population growth are important factors to understand past trends and project future wastewater flows. Figure 2 -7 shows the City’s population growth forecast as shown in the City’s Housing Element, with a projected 2021 population of 157,805.
F I G U R E 2 - 7 : C I T Y P O P U L A T I O N G R O W T H
According to the 2020 Census, the total population for the City of Salinas is 163,542. For the purposes of this SSMPU, 163,542 persons will be used for the current 2021 population.
Population Densities
The following Table 3 summarizes the average number of residential units per land use according to the 2014 Economic Development Element.
T a b l e 2 - 5 . R E S I D E N T I A L D E N S I T I E S
U N I T S / A C R E
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 6.5
M E D I U M D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 11.75 H I G H D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 16.75
1 4 2 , 6 8 5 1 4 6 , 5 6 3 1 5 0 , 4 4 1 1 5 3 , 6 1 7 1 5 6 , 7 9 3 2021 , 1 5 7 , 8 0 5
1 6 1 , 8 5 3 1 6 6 , 9 1 2 1 7 2 , 4 9 9
-
5 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 5 0 , 0 0 0
2 0 0 , 0 0 0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
P O P U L A T I O N
Y E A R
2-8
Future Population
In August 2019, AMBAG staff met with City staff to review the forecasts for future growth. Information collected from this meeting was presented to the AMBAG Board of Directors in the Final 2020 Regional Growth Forecast Memorandum. Based on the findings, 175,358 persons is projected to be the City’s future population in the Year 2040.
According to the City’s General Plan, the buildout population proj ected beyond 2035 for the City is 213,063 persons. This is based on the General Plan’s Development Capacity table which considers projected populations for the City’s focused growth and future growth areas. As part of the City’s 2017 Economic Development Element, amendments to the General Plan were proposed; however, the projected buildout population remained the same.
For the purposes of this SSMPU, 213,063 persons will be used for the City’s buildout population.
County Boronda
Bolsa Knolls
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Ag-Industrial
CenterLegend
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Target Areas
Existing Sewer Service Area
Future Growth Area
Bolsa Knolls
County Boronda Area
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-1
EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Legend
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Agriculture
Commercial
High Density Residential
Hotel
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Mobile Home
Open Space
Parking/Roads
Public & Semi-public
School
Vacant
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-2
EXISTING SERVICE AREA
LAND USE
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
North Boronda FGA
East FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Abbott Street
South Main Street
EastAlisal Street/
EastMarket Street
Laurel Drive at
North Main Street
North MainStreet/
Soledad Street
Target Area B
Target Area N
Target Area V
Target Area L
Target Area K
Target Area F
Bolsa Knolls
Industrial
FGA
Legend
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Bolsa Knolls
Industrial FGA
Focused Growth Area
Abbott Street
East Alisal Street/East Market Street
Laurel Drive at North Main Street
North Main Street/Soledad Street
South Main Street
Future Growth Area
East FGA
North Boronda FGA
Southeast FGA
West Boronda FGA
Target Areas
Target Area B
Target Area F
Target Area K
Target Area L
Target Area N
Target Area V
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-3
CITY GROWTH AREAS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
South Main Street
Abbott Street
East Alisal Street/
East Market Street
Laurel Drive at
North Main Street
North Main Street/
Soledad Street
Legend
GPLU
Commercial
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Industrial
Mixed Use
Open Space
Public/Semipublic
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-4
FOCUSED GROWTH AREAS
LAND USE
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 2,000 feet
North Boronda FGA
East
FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast
FGA
Industrial
FGA
Legend
Industrial
Commercial
Mixed Use
Open Space
Public/Semi-Public
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
SSMPU Study Area
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-5
FUTURE GROWTH AREAS
LAND USE
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Bolsa Knolls
East Area
Specific Plan
West Area
Specific Plan
Central Area
Specific Plan
Legend
Central Area Specifc Plan
East Area Specific Plan
West Area Specific Plan
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-6
NORTH BORONDA
FGA SPECIFIC PLANS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 3,000 feet
3-1
C H AP T E R 3
CO L L EC T I O N SYST E M OV ERV I E W
This Chapter provides an overview of the existing domestic wastewater collection system for the City. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M O V E R V I E W
The City operates two sewer collection systems, the municipal collection system, which collects wastewater from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial users throughout the City; and the Industrial Wastewater Collection and Conveyance System (IWCCS), which collects wastewater from industrial users located mostly within the southeastern portion of the City. This report is for the municipal sewer collection system and does not consider the industrial system.
The City’s municipal sewer collection system is comprised of approximately 292 miles of gravity pipes, which vary in diameter from 6-inch to 54-inches, ten (10) City-owned lift stations, one (1) City-maintained lift station, and two (2) miles of force mains. According to the California Integrated Water Quality System Project (CIWQS), 70% of the City’s collection system was constructed before 1980, with 41% of the system constructed between 1960 -1979.
The remaining 30% of the system was constructed from 1980 to present.
The sewer collection system conveys the City’s wastewater to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) located at the southwest corner of the City near Blanco Road and Davis Road. SAPS is owned and operated by Monterey One Water (M1W), formerly Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA).
Gravity Sewer Mains
Table 3-1 breaks down the City’s gravity sewer inventory. According to the City’s GIS database, 9.6% of the sewer collection system has an unknown diameter. Most of these unknown diameters are at upstream port ions of the primary collection system and are assumed to be of smaller diameter (likely 6- or 8-inch) that will not significantly affect the sewer modeling of the main trunk lines. Figure 3-1 displays the City’s gravity sewers by diameter.
Most of th e existing collection system buried piping material is Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP). Although Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) pipe would have likely been installed with newer construction from 1980 to present. Hydraulic modeling of the sewer lines assumes that the p ipe material is VCP unless the pipe material was visually verified by the survey work performed for this SSMPU.
3-2
T A B L E 3 - 1 . G R A V I T Y S E W E R I N V E N T O R Y B Y D I A M E T E R
D I A M E T E R
( I N )
L E N G T H
( M I L E S )
% O F S E W E R
S Y S T E M
U N K N O W N 27.5 9.6%
6 - I N C H 61.3 21.4%
8 - I N C H 124.0 43.2%
10 - I N C H 19.9 6.9%
12 - I N C H 14.2 5.0%
15 - I N C H 10.1 3.5%
18 - I N C H 9.2 3.2%
21 - I N C H 4.4 1.5%
24 - I N C H 3.8 1.3%
27 - I N C H 2.6 0.9%
30 - I N C H 2.6 0.9%
33 - I N C H 1.2 0.4%
36 - I N C H 0.5 0.2%
42 - I N C H 1.8 0.6%
48 - I N C H 1.2 0.4%
54 - I N C H 2.4 0.9%
T O T A L 286.7 100%
Manholes
Based on the City’s GIS database, the existing wastewater collection system contains 3,462 sewer manholes. There are both concrete and brick manholes throughout the collection system. It is estimated that approximately 5-10% of the manholes are brick manholes, which no longer meets City standards. Brick manholes can be a source of infiltration of water and sand and can potentially fail if bricks are offset. Additionally, the City’s collection system contains 1,403 flushing inlets/cleanouts. These can often limit access for operation and maintenance (O&M) staff to inspect and clean the sewer mains.
It is recommended to complete annual manhole inspections as part of the CCTV program to identify manholes in poor condition and replace or rehabilitate as required. This may include concrete manholes that have severe hydrogen sulfide corrosion, brick manholes that are cause of significant infiltration or are failing, and bro ken flushing inlets. As on -going improvements to extend the life of the sewer collection system are made, it is recommended that all brick manholes be either replaced with new manholes, or at minimum install a coating or lining. Flushing inlets should be r eplaced with 8 -inch inspection ports or new manholes. These are low -priority upgrades, but should be considered as an on -going operations and maintenance project to continue improving operations and reducing infiltration of sand and water and potential for failures. Figure 3-2 shows the locations of brick manholes and corroded manholes (74 total) identified by field survey and all the City’s flushing inlets. 3-3
Lift Stations
The City owns and operates ten (10) lift stations located throughout the collection system. The City also maintains the Vista Nueva Lift Station under an assessment district. Recently, tenants at Harris Place Industrial Park have requested that the City assume operations and maintenance of the privately-owned Harris Lift Station. The City is currently preparing a study to determine the feasibility of operating this lift station under separate cover and therefore, Harris Lift Station is not included in this report. Chapter 5 provides a detailed description of the lift stations and recom mended improvements. The following is a list of the 11 City owned and/or operated lift stations:
❖ Airport (Moffett) ❖ Mill Lake
❖ Carpenter Hall ❖ Santa Rita
❖ De La Torre ❖ Spicer
❖ Harkins Road ❖ TP2
❖ Lake Street ❖ Vista Nueva
❖ Las Casitas
All lift station force mains tie into the City’s gravity system for conveyance to SAPS. City staff conducts regular maintenance of the City’s lift stations. In 2018, staff initiated a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) program to monitor all lift stations. Th is SCADA program tracks flows and motor run times and offers an alarm system that calls staff directly if there are any operational issues at the lift stations.
In addition to the City -owned and operated lift stations, the City also receives wastewater fl ows from ten (10) private lift stations located throughout the City. These lift stations service commercial complexes and industrial facilities that discharge directly into the City’s gravity system. The locations of these lift stations are listed below:
❖ Oregon and Sanborn Street ❖ Natividad Hospital
❖ 11 Harris Place ❖ 58 Natividad Road
❖ 1121 Alamo Way ❖ Northridge Mall
❖ 115 San Juan Grade Road ❖ Salinas Adult School
❖ 150 Sherwood Drive ❖ Sherwood Hall
All City-owned, County-owned, and private lift stations are shown on Figure 3-3. 3-4
Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS)
As stated above, wastewater collected in the City’s municipal sewer system flows to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS), operated by Monterey One Water (M1W). SAPS feeds into a 36-inch forcemain from Salinas to the regional wastewater treatment plant operated by M1W near the City of Marina. Here the wastewater is treated and then used for beneficial re -use or discharged to the ocean via a 60 -inch diameter outfall. SAPS is shown in the southwestern corner of the City on Figure 3-3.
Inverted Siphons
The City has four (4) known inverted siphon locations within the sewer collection system. These inverted siphons are used to carry wastewater flows under creeks and highways. Inverted siphons often present hydraulic issues and require periodic flushing during low flows. The known inverted siphon locations are shown on Figure 3-3 and are modeled according to record drawings provided by the City.
Industrial Wastewater Diversion
As stated above, the City owns and operates a separate collection system which receives only industrial wastewater that flows to the City owned Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility (IWTF). Although the industrial wastewater collection system is not part of this SSMPU, it is important to note that a concrete shunt structure allows the diversion of produce wash water and winter stormwater discharges from this industrial wastewater conveyance system to enter the City’s wa stewater collection system at the SAPS location, just upstream of the flow totalizer. M1W monitors and operates this industrial wastewater diversion and has provided the daily diversion flows from May 5, 2016 to June 30, 2018. Since the SAPS location is th e most downstream point in the City’s collection system, these diverted flows do not affect the City’s collection system and are not considered in the sewer model.
Reclamation Ditch Diversion
This diversion structure was recently constructed and brought on -line in 2018. It is located in the existing Reclamation Ditch near the intersection of Davis Road and West Market Street/Highway 183 in Salinas. According to the State Water Resources Control Board Permit 21377, this project allows for up to 6 c ubic feet per second (cfs) by direct diversion from the Reclamation Ditch and pumped into the City’s collection system. M1W owns and operates this reclamation ditch diversion. These reclamation ditch diversion flows were considered in the hydraulic model since they feed into the main 54-inch trunk line that conveys flow along Davis Road to SAPS.
3-5
H I G H P R I O R I T Y A R E A S
According to the City’s 2019 Sanitary Sewer Collection System Annual Performance Report, City staff perform high-priority and routine line cl eaning, manhole inspections, and lift station inspections each business day. In 2019, wastewater staff cleaned 116 miles of pipe, which is an increase of 93 miles from the year before. In the same year, approximately 48,075 linear feet of CCTV inspections were performed to identify damages or causes of blockages in City sewer lines. The City has not provided an inspection report for these videos; therefore, the results of this inspection are not included in this SSMPU.
City Manhole Monitors
The City installed fifty-six (56) manhole monitors at locations with either historical surcharging or sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) issues. In 2021, staff responded to eighteen (18) manhole monitoring alarms indicating sewer surcharging. This avoided potential SSOs from the sewer system and helped the Wastewater Division meet its goal of having five or less overflows on the City main line per year. Over the last few years, the City has met this goal with the following SSOs per year: four (4) in 2018, two (2) in 2019, two (2) in 2020, and five (5) in 2021. Table 3-2 summarizes the location of all the monitors and Figure 3-4 shows high priority sewe r mains as identified by the City and past locations of SSO manholes.
3-6
T A B L E 3 - 2 . M A N H O L E M O N I T O R I N G L O C A T I O N S
MH - ID L O C A T I O N
M5 - 020 JOHN ST. & GRIFFIN ST.
M5 - 009 500 JOHN ST.
M5 - 012 599 JAMES ST.
M5 - 013 105 NORTH WOOD ST.
L5 - 033 481 E. MARKET ST.
L5 - 020 127 CARR AVE.
L6 - 016 700 ELTON PLACE
M3 - 050 500 LINCOLN AVE.
M3 - 036 602 RIKER ST.
L3 - 020 210 CAPITOL ST.
L3 - 013 142 W MARKET ST.
L2 - 014 33 VILLA ST.
K4 - 0 5 2 177 SHERWOOD DR.
I4 - 029 1149 SHERWOOD DR.
G4 - 0 2 9 223 N FIRST ST.
I3 - 056 119 SHERMAN DR.
G3 - 0 2 8 447 COMANCHE WAY
G4 - 0 3 4 1502 WHEELER DR.
G4 - 0 2 3 44 JULIA AVE.
G5 - 0 1 2 55 KIP DR.
F4 - 015 472 REGENCY CIRCLE
D4 - 064 13278 JACKSON ST.
D4 - 001 13170 LOUISE ST
D4 - 030 18601 COOLIDGE
H7 - 075 1619 MARSHFIELD CT.
I8 - 039 1205 NOGAL DR.
MH - ID L O C A T I O N
J8 - 004 1002 DEL MONTE AVE.
J7 - 041 1035 ATLANTIC ST.
K8 - 0 2 4 1116 CORTEZ ST.
H4 - 015 1020 E. LAUREL DR.
L8 - 028 183 DENNIS AVE.
L8 - 031 176 AFTON RD.
N7 - 014 1340 MERCER WAY
G8 - 0 1 1 1166 ROCKHAVEN CT.
J9 - 014 1044 BISON WAY
I5 - 036 77 SAINT FRANCIS WAY
L3 - 029 26 STONE ST.
G6 - 0 1 8 744 SAUCITO AVE
N6 - 013 9 MAYFAIR DR.
D4 - 028 18588 NORTHRIDGE DR.
D5 - 001 18807 LENNY ST.
M8 - 016 200 TAMPA ST.
M7 - 016 15 PALOMA AVE.
O3 - 0 1 1 321 WOODSIDE DR.
G6 - 0 0 9 1538 MARIN AVE.
I4 - 001 939 HEATHER CIRCLE
N2 - 020 432 WOODSIDE DR.
K4 - 0 2 3 146 LAKE ST.
H3 - 043 805 W LAUREL DR.
H6 - 014 1515 LOS ALTOS WAY
H3 - 043 805 W LAUREL DR.
L6 - 036 30 CENTER ST.
3-7
2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation
In 2017, Mark Thomas Engineering performed a CCTV sanitary sewer analysis of approximately 5,300 linear feet, or approximately 0.3%, of sanitary sewer mains and twenty-three (23) manhole structures in the southeast corner of the City. The report used the National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program (PACP) and Manhole Assessment and Certification Program (MACP). The condition of the pipes and manholes were graded based upon observed structural and ope rations and maintenance defects.
Table 3-3 below summarizes this grading system used and Figure 3-5 displays the CCTV analysis findings with notes about each manhole and pipe condition. All recommended pipe and manhole repairs from this CCTV evaluation are listed and prioritized as existing CIPs and discussed further in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU. The full evaluation report can be found in Appendix B of this SSMPU.
T A B L E 3 - 3 . P A C P A N D M A C P G R A D I N G T A B L E
G R A D E
G R A D E
D E S C R I P T I O N
S T R U C T U R A L A N D
O & M D E F I N I T I O N
G E N E R A L D E T E R I O R A T I O N
D E F I N I T I O N
5 Immediate
Action
Defects requiring immediate
attention
Failed or will likely fail within
the next 5 years
4 Poor
Sever defects that will
become Grade 5 defects
within the foreseeable
future
Probably fail in 5 -10 years
3 Fair Moderate defects that will
continue to deteriorate May fail in 10 -20 years
2 Good Defects that have not begun
to deteriorate
Unlikely to fail for at least 20
years
1 Excellent Minor defects Unlikely in the foreseeable future
O&M Repairs
The City has a list of known operations and maintenance (O&M) problem areas throughout the City. The nature of the problem areas ranges from pipe sags/joints and pipe damage to manhole repairs to hydrogen sulfide corrosion and fats, oils, and grease (FOG) build-up. Table 3-4 summarizes these City identified locations and groups repair projects together based on priority, repair type, and location. All City identified repairs are listed and prioritized as existing CIPs and discussed further in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU. All repair projects are detailed in the City’s Sewer Repair Atlas Map in Appendix C.
Additionally, the City should prioritize their CCTV program to inspect the entire collection system every five years.
This would mean the City should complete an average of 58 miles per year, a significant increase from the 14.7 miles inspected in 2021 and 8.1 miles inspected in 2020. Table 3-5 assumes the cost of cleaning and CCTV based on similar work performed in Monterey County. In order to account for a 3% inflation rate each year, Table 3 -6 summarizes the cost per year that should be budgeted by the C ity. This ongoing CCTV program is included as an existing CIP in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU.
3-8
T A B L E 3 - 4 . O & M R E P A I R S
C O M B I N E D O & M P R O J E C T
C I T Y L O C A T I O N
A T L A S I D
A C A C I A , B A U T I S T A ,
W O O D S I D E R E P A I R S
ACACIA CIRCLE NORTH
WOODSIDE DR.
BAUTISTA DR.
WEST ACACIA ST.
N3
C O M A N C H E , P O L K , A N D
N O R T H F I R S T R E P A I R S
COMANCHE WAY
POLK ST.
NORTH 1 ST ST.
G3, I3, H4
D E L M O N T E A N D M A E
R E P A I R S
726 MAE AVE. AND C ST.
DEL MONTE AVE.
MAE AVE.
K8
D O N N E R W A Y R E P A I R DONNER WAY G6
E L A U R E L A N D W I L L I A M S
R E P A I R S
E. LAUREL DR.
WILLIAMS RD.
K7, L7
E A S T M A R K E T A N D
U P S T R E A M O F L A K E
S T R E E T R E P A I R S
YORKSHIRE WAY
LONGBOW WAY
SUN ST.
E MARKET ST.
N MADEIRA AVE.
K5
H O O V E R S T R E P A I R 1885 HOOVER ST. C5
J O H N S O N P L A C E R E P A I R S JOHNSON PLACE (FIRE STATION #3) O5 K A T H E R I N E A V E . &
P A J A R O S T . R E P A I R S
KATHERINE AVE.
PAJARO ST.
O4
K I N G S T R E E T R E P A I R S KING ST. L5
L O U I S E A N D V A N B U R E N
S T R E E T R E P A I R S
LENNY ST. AND LOUISE ST.
VAN BUREN AVE.
D4
M A L A R I N S T A N D
W I L G A R T W A Y R E P A I R S
WILGART WAY
WORK ST AND BRUNKEN AVE.
LOS PALOS DR. AND FAIRMONT DR.
O4, N5
N M A I N S T H W Y 1 0 1
U N D E R P A S S B U N K E R
R E P A I R
N. MAIN ST. UNDERPASS BUNKER
HWY 101
J4
R I K E R S T R E E T R E P A I R 555 RIKER STREET M3
R O M I E L A N E R E P A I R S &
R E C O N F I G U R A T I O N
A N A L Y S I S
ROMIE LANE BETWEEN LOS PALOS
AND PAJARO
O4
S A N M I G U E L A V E R E P A I R PAJARO ST./SAN MIGUEL AVE. O4 S H E R W O O D D R R E P A I R S SHERWOOD DR. K4
3-9
C O M B I N E D O & M P R O J E C T
C I T Y L O C A T I O N
A T L A S I D
U P P E R C A R R L A K E
R E P A I R S
LAUREL DR. BIKE TRAIL
J6
W E S T M A R K E T A T D A V I S
O V E R C R O S S I N G
W. MARKET ST. AND DAVIS
OVERCROSSING
K2
W E S T M A R K E T S T R E E T
R E P A I R S
10 VILLA ST.
W. MARKET ST. NEAR MARKET
CAPITOL ST. TO 10 CAPITOL ST.
CAPITOL ST.
L3
W O O D S T R E E T
R E C O N F I G U R A T I O N
A N A L Y S I S
WOOD ST.
L5
3-10
T A B L E 3 - 5 . C C T V C O S T S
D I A M E T E R
( I N )
L E N G T H
( F T )
C L E A N I N G & C C T V
C O S T ( $ / L F )
T O T A L C O S T
6 - 1 2 I N C H E S 1,303, 314 $5.00 $6,516,570
15 - 2 7 I N C H E S 158,931 $10.00 $1,589,310
30 - 5 4 I N C H E S 51, 498 $13.00 $669,475
T O T A L 1,513,776 $8,775,355
T A B L E 3 - 6 . A N N U A L C C T V P R O G R A M
Y E A R B U D G E T1
Y E A R 1 $1,769,000
Y E A R 2 $1,822,000
Y E A R 3 $1,877,000
Y E A R 4 $1,933,000
Y E A R 5 $1,991,000
T O T A L
$9,392,000
1Th e annu al b udget in cludes a 3% es calatio n ra t e p er year.
Legend
Unknown Diameter
8-inch or less
10-inch
12-inch
15-inch
18-inch
21-inch
24-inch
27-inch
30-inch
33-inch
36-inch
42-inch
48-inch
54-inch
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-1
EXISTING PIPE DIAMETER
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")
")")")")
")")
")")
") ")
")
")")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")")")
")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")") ")
")")") ")
") ")
")")")") ") ")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")")")
")
") ")
")")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")")")")
")
")")
")")
")")")")
") ")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
") ")")")")
")
")
")
")
")")
") ")")
")
")
") ")
")")")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")
")")")
")
")")
")")
")
")")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")")
")") ")
")")")
")")")
")")
")")")
")")")
")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")
")")
")")
")
") ")")
")")
") ")")
")
")")")
")
")")")")")
")")
")")")")
")
")")")") ")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")")")")
")
")
")")
")
") ")")
")
")
")")")")
")")")
")")")
") ")
")
") ")
")
")
")")")")
")
")
")")
") ")
")")
")
")
")")")")
")
")")")")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")")
")")
")")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")") ")")
") ")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")
")")
")")")")
")
")
")")")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")")")
")
")
")")")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")")
")
")")")
")
") ") ")")
")
")")")
")")")")")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")
")")")")")
")
")
")") ")
")") ")
")")")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")")")")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")")")
")
")
")") ")")
")
")") ")
")
")
")")") ")
")")
")
")")
")")
")")
")
")
")")
")
")")")
")")")")")")")
")
")")") ") ")")")")
")
")
")
")")")
")
")")")
")")
")
") ")")
")
")")
")") ")")
")")")")
")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")")")
")")
")")
")
")")
")")")")
")") ") ")
")
")")
")")")")")
") ")")") ")
")
")")")")") ")
")
")")")
")
")")")")
")")")")")")")
")")
")
")")") ")")")")")") ")
")")")
")")")
")
")")
")")")
") ")
")")
")
")")")")")") ")")")")")")")
")")")")")")
") ")")")
")")")")")")")
")")")
")
")")
")
")")")")
")") ")")") ")")
")
")
")
")")")
")
")")
")")
")")")
") ")
")")")
")")
")")
")")
")")
")")")
")")")")")
")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")
")")")")")")
")")
")")
")")")
")")
")
")")")
")")
")
")")")")
")
")")
")")
")
")")
")") ")
")
")
")
")")
")")")")
")")
")")")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")")")
")")
")") ")")
")
")")
") ")
") ")
")
")
")")")
")
")")")") ")
")")")")
")
")
") ")")")")
")
")
")
")") ")
")
")")")
") ")")")")
")") ")
")")
")")")") ")")
")")
")")")")")
")")
")
")")")
")")
")")")
")
")
") ")
")")")")")
")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")")")") ")")")
")")
") ")")
")")")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")")")")
")")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")") ")")
")")")
") ") ")
")")
")")")
")
")")") ")
")")
")
")")")
")
")")
")
")")
")")
")")
")")
")")")
")
")
")
")")
")")
")")")") ")")
")")
")
")")
")")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")")")
") ")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")")")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")")")")")")")
") ") ")
")
")")
") ")")")")
")
")")
")
")")")
")
") ")") ")")")
")
")
")")
")
")")")")
")")")")
")
")")") ")")")
")")
")
")")")
")") ")")")")")")
")
")")")
")")
") ")
")")")
")")
")")")
")")
")
")
")")
")")
")
")")
")")
")
")")") ")")")
")
")
")
")") ") ")
")")
")")")")")
")") ")
") ")")")")
")") ")
")
")")")
")
") ")")
")")")
")")
")
")
")
")")")")
")")")") ")
")")")")") ")")
")
")")
")
")
")
")")")
")")")")")")
")")
") ")")")
")")") ")")
")")
")
")")")
")
")
")")
")")")")
")")
")
") ")
")")
")")
")
")")")
")")
")")
")")")")") ")")")") ")
")
")")
")")
")")
")
")") ")")
")") ")")
")")")
")
")
")
")
")")")
")
")
")") ")")")
")
")")")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")")
")")
")
")")
") ")
")")
")
")")
")
")
!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2
!!2
!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2!!2!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2 !!2
!!2!!2 !!2 !!2
!!2
!!2 !!2!!2
!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2 !!2 !!2
Legend
!!2 Surveyed Brick Manholes
!!2 Surveyed Corroded Manholes
") Flushing Inlets
Sewer Mains
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-2
LOW PRIORITY REPLACEMENTS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Boronda No.2
Boronda No.1
Boronda No.4
Legend
3Ú Salinas Area Pump Station
3Ú City Lift Stations
3Ú County Lift Stations
3Ú Private Lift Stations
Sewer Mains
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-3
LIFT STATIONS & SIPHONS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Industrial Wastewater
Diversion
Inverted Siphon
Inverted Siphon
Inverted Siphon
Reclamation Ditch &
Inverted Siphon
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2 !!2
!!2 !!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
!!2
MH-D4-001
MH-D5-001
MH-F4-015
MH-I4-001
MH-J8-004
MH-M5-009
MH-M5-012
MH-M5-013
MH-K4-023
MH-M8-016
MH-L8-028
MH-L8-031
MH-L5-020
MH-L6-016
MH-N6-013
MH-M7-016
MH-K8-024
MH-J7-041
MH-G8-011
MH-G6-009
MH-L6-036
MH-L3-013
MH-H3-043
MH-G3-028
MH-H6-014
MH-G6-018
MH-H4-015
MH-G5-012
MH-G4-023
MH-D4-028
MH-D4-030
MH-O3-011
MH-L3-020
MH-L3-029
MH-M3-036
MH-L5-033
MH-M5-020
MH-I8-039
MH-N2-020
MH-L2-014
MH-I4-029
MH-I5-036
MH-G4-029
MH-G4-034
MH-H7-075
MH-J9-014
MH-N7-014
MH-K4-052
MH-D4-064
MH-I3-056
MH-M3-050
Legend
!!2 Manhole Monitoring Locations
#* SSO Locations
High Priority Sewer Mains
Sewer Mains
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-4
CITY MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2
!!2!!2!!2!!2
!!2!!2
!!2
!!2!!2!!2
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:Relining
manhole, new bench,
and rechannelize
MH Repair:New
Frame & Cover
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cover; reline;
new bench&channelize
MH Repair:New
manhole
MH Repair:New Frame&Cvr
w PCC collar;
line in 5 yrs
MH Repair:New Frame&Cvr
w PCC collar;
line in 5 yrs
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cvr;
install marker
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cvr;
install marker
MH Repair:Expose
& raise manhole.
Currently buried
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:Reline
manhole in 2 years
MH Repair:Expose
and Raise Manhole
to Grade; buried
MH Repair:No
work.
MH Repair:
Expose and Raise
Manhole to Grade;
buried
MH Repair:PCC collar
to prevent I/I; new
bench&rechannelize
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; reline
MH Repair:New
Frame & cover
MH Repair:New
chimney; PCC collar;
regrout or line
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; install marker
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover; install
ecc. cone for fence
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; install marker
Pipe Repair: Great condition
Pipe Repair:
Broken condition; Broken
pipe, encrustations
Pipe Repair:
Good condition; d/D
of 0.85
Pipe Repair:
Great condition; WLS
of 0.35, root
ball at SSMH 7
Pipe Repair:
Good condition; d/D of
0.75, grease
deposits
Pipe Repair:
Great condition; WLS of
0.25, grease
deposits
Pipe Repair:
Fair condition; d/D of
0.6, partial
grease block
Pipe Repair:
Fair condition; WLS
of 0.6,
encrustations
Pipe Repair:
Fair condition; WLS 0.25,
d/D of 0.9,
grease deposits
Pipe Repair:
Good condition; cracks,
grease deposits
1 in = 2,000 Feet
O
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-5
MARK THOMAS CCTV FINDINGS
Legend
Inspected Pipes
Structural Grade 1
Structural Grade 2
Structural Grade 3
Structural Grade 4
Structural Grade 5
Misc. (See Note)
Inspected Manholes
!!2 Grade 3
!!2 Grade 4
!!2 Grade 5
!!2 Misc. (See Note)
4-1
C H AP T E R 4
WA ST E WAT ER F LOWS
This Chapter presents the results of the sewer flow monitoring and the development of the wastewater flow characteristics used for the analysis of the collection system for the City. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Wastewater flows were evaluated from three sources described in the following sections:
❖ Temporary flow meters installed in the City’s sewer system
❖ Wastewater flow records provided by Monterey One Water
❖ Water use records provided by the City’s water purv eyors: California Water Service and Alco Water Service
W A S T E W A T E R F L O W M O N I T O R I N G
To develop a better understanding of the existing wastewater flows, in -line flow monitoring was conducted at eighteen (18) different locations on main trunk lines throughou t the City. Temporary sewer flow monitoring locations were selected based upon downstream locations for sewersheds of similar land uses that could be calibrated for the proposed sewer model development. The locations of the flow meters and their corresponding tributary areas are depicted on Figure 4-1.
Flow meter locations 1-15 were installed by USCubed (US3) on March 5-6, 2021. For redundancy in calculating the total flow of the system, meter locations 16 -18 just upstream of SAPS were installed by US 3 on March 30, 2021.
These three additional monitoring locations were selected after anomalies were discovered in the SAPS flow data.
All meters were removed April 20 -21, 2021. Locations 1-15 were monitored for a total of 45 days and locations 16-18 were monitored for a total of 21 days. After review of locations 16 and 17, it was discovered that the 54 - inch line conveying most of the western portion of the City’s flow was not monitored due to inaccurate GIS data; therefore, these flow monitoring results were not used as a check against the SAPS total flow data.
Flow Meters
FLO-DAR® flow meters were used for the wastewater flow monitoring. These flow meters are mounted to the manhole wall, above the flow where they should not encounter any potential debris o r grease that would affect readings. A digital Doppler radar is used to measure the velocity and direction of flow every 15 minutes.
Additionally, the flow level is measured by ultrasonic pulse echo and recorded as well.
Since sewer flow monitoring does not continuously record flow, it is unable to record transient events of very short duration, in this case of less than 15 minutes. The flow monitoring does, however, provide an estimate of the amount of wastewater generated by various sewersheds during t he monitoring event. This provides useful information about the diurnal sewer flow patterns for each sewershed and can also potentially show the impacts of inflow and infiltration. The following provides a summary of the benefits and the potential problem with sewer flow monitoring:
4-2
Benefits
❖ Provides hourly and daily wastewater flow averages for various sewersheds within the community. This can be used to help differentiate between the amount of wastewater flow coming from residential versus commercial development.
❖ Evaluates diurnal trends within the community, which will help estimate the peaking factors that are required to size the collection system and evaluate the remaining capacity within the existing collection system
❖ May help evaluate the potential impacts of inflow and infiltration if the monitoring event spans both dry weather and wet weather events.
Potential Drawback
❖ The flow meters read every 15 minutes, providing only an average of the flow over the 15-minute period. The averages are then totaled for the day to get total daily flows. There are possibilities that the flow meter could miss higher peaks that may come through the collection system between readings.
Flow Monitoring Summary
The goal of flow monitoring is to record wastewater flows and establish diurnal trends that will be used to calibrate the sewer model. The following Table 4 -1 provides a summary of the results from each of the flow monitoring stations.
4-3
T A B L E 4 - 1 . F L O W M O N I T O R I N G S U M M A R Y
L O C A T I O N
P R I M A R Y
L A N D U S E
A V E R A G E
D A I L Y F L O W
( G P D )
M O N I T O R I N G
N O T E S
1 S U C R E
Residential -65%
Commercial -
15%
534,842
Three lines entering from the east,
west, and south. Downstream 15 -
inch line was monitored.
2 H A R D E N
Residential -70%
Commercial -
22%
190,354
Three lines entering from the east,
north, and south. Downstream 32 -
inch line was monitored.
3 L A U R E L
Residential -60%
School -25% 198,404
Two lines entering from the east
and north. Downstream 8 -inch line
was monitored.
4 C O N S T I T U T I O N
Residential -73%
Public/Semi -
Public -15%
414,180
No laterals. Upstream 24 -inch line
was monitored. Levels and
velocities began dropping to zero
during 4/8 -4/13 of the study. No
issue was found with the
equipment, but those days were
not included in the Average Daily
Flow total.
5 R A N C H V I E W
Residential -42%
School -40% 386,611
No laterals. Upstream 21 -inch line
was monitored. US3 notes levels
and velocities began dropping to
zero during the last three days of
the study. No issue was found with
the equipment, but those days
were not included in the Average
Daily Flow total.
6 A L I S A L
Residential -74%
School -40% 291,616
Two lines entering from the
northeast and southwest.
Downstream 15 -inch line was
monitored.
7 E U C A L Y P T U S
Residential -71%
School -14% 777,840
Two lines entering from the east
and north. Downstream 18 -inch
line was monitored.
8 D A V I S
Residential -52%
Commerical -
29%
1,715,731
Two lines entering from the north
and west. Downstream 24 -inch line
was monitored.
4-4
T A B L E 4 - 1 . F L O W M O N I T O R I N G S U M M A R Y ( C O N T . )
L O C A T I O N
P R I M A R Y
L A N D U S E
A V E R A G E
D A I L Y F L O W
( G P D )
M O N I T O R I N G
N O T E S
9 E L R A N C H O
Residential -89%
Hotel -8% 46,255 No laterals. Upstream 8 -inch line
was monitored.
1 0 M A D I S O N
Commercial-57%
Residential-33% 291,616
Two lines entering from the east and
one line from the west. Downstream
10-inch line was monitored.
1 1 C H E R O K E E
Residential-67%
Commercial-19% 1,881,437
Two lines entering from the north and
west. Downstream 18-inch line was
monitored.
1 2 L A K E S T 2 4
Residential-70%
Public/Semi-
Public -10%
583,734
No laterals. Upstream 24-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes this site had
sediment in the line and program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
1 3 L A K E S T 3 0
Residential-55%
Commercial-21% 1,884,712
No laterals. Upstream 30-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes levels and
velocities dropped to zero somewhere
between 3-8am almost every day
during the study.
1 4 B R I D G E
Residential-58%
Public/Semi-
Public-19%
1,717,329
No laterals. Upstream 36-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes this site has
sediment in the line and program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
1 5 S A N B O R N
Residential-33%
Commercial-29% 1,428,913
Two lines entering from the north and
west. Downstream 24-inch line was
monitored.
1 6 & 1 7
H I T C H C O C K
Residential- 48%
Commercial-18% 1,364,436
No laterals. Downstream 24-inch line
was monitored. US3 notes that
program parameters were used at Site
17 to reduce issues due to the poor
hydraulics.
1 8 H I T C H C O C K
Residential-40%
Industrial-26% 1,892,455
No laterals. Downstream 36-inch line
was monitored. US3 notes program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
4-5
S A L I N A S A R E A P U M P S T A T I O N A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S
Monterey One Water provided total daily flows at SAPS from January 20, 2015 to June 30, 2018 for historical use.
They also provided January through May 2021 to compare total flows during the same time period as the flow monitoring. Flows in the latter half of 2018 through 2020 were not provided due to several anomalies such as large jumps and dips that are not typical to total sewer flows, thus the data was unreliable. M1W reports that anomalies may be due to the flow meter needing calibration, cleaning, or repairs.
Table 4-2 presents the average daily flow for the years 2015-2017. These values represent domestic wastewater in the City’s system. Industrial wastewater flows that were diverted to SAPS during these years were subtracted from the total metered wastewater flow at SAPS to determine the actual flows from the domestic sewer collection system.
T A B L E 4 - 2 . S A P S D O M E S T I C W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S
Y E A R A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W ( M G D )
2 0 1 5 11.32
2 0 1 6 10.12
2 0 1 7 9.94
A V E R A G E 10.46
It should be noted that the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan notes an average daily flow of 12.5 MGD from 2002-2007. Although the population has increased since this time, the decrease in sewer flows can be attributed to significant water conservation efforts that occurred during the statewide drought water conservation mandates which included more water efficient water fixtures installed subsequent to 2007.
To further this point, a draft of the West Area Specific Plan states that conservation effort decreased M1W Plant flows from 21 MGD in 2014 to 16 MGD in 2016. Of the 16 MGD, the City of Salinas contributed 12 MGD. This number is the total flow from SAPS to M1W Regional Treatment Plant, including the industrial waste water diversion flow. The average daily flow for 2016 in Table 4-2 subtracts this metered industrial wastewater diversion, which is approximately 2.7 MG for the months of May-October, to provide total domestic flows entering the SAPS. 4-6
W A T E R U S E D A T A
Wastewater flows were also calibrated by comparing the estimated wastewater flows to water use records. Water use records for the year 2020 were provided by the City’s water purveyors: California Water Service and Alco Water Service. In order to compare water use records to wastewater flow, it is important to identify outdoor versus indoor water use that would contribute flow to the wastewater system. Known irrigation accounts were identified and removed from the data provided in order to estimate indoor water use. The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan estimates sewer flows as 85% of the lowest monthly average water consumption or as 75% of the annual average water consumption. Table 4-3 provides a summary of sewer flows using these ratios.
T A B L E 4 - 3 . W A T E R U S E
W A T E R
U S E
( M G D )
R E T U R N T O
S E W E R
R A T I O
D O M E S T I C
W A S T E W A T E R
( M G D )
M A R C H 2 0 2 0 ( L O W E S T M O N T H ) 11.95 0.85 10.16 2 0 2 0 A N N U A L A V E R A G E 15.58 0.75 11.69
E X I S T I N G W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S
After analyzing the average daily sewer flows via flow monitoring results, the 2015-2017 SAPS influent flow data, and the City’s domestic water use records, for the purposes of this report and model calibration, the average daily flow for the City of Salinas is 10,460,000 gallons. Based on the calculated average daily flow for various sewersheds and land uses, the wastewater flow factors for various existing land uses within the City were developed and are presented in Table 4-4.
T A B L E 4 - 4 . E X I S T I N G F L O W F A C T O R S
Q U A N T I T Y U N I T
F L O W F A C T O R
( G P D / U N I T )
E X I S T I N G
A V E R A G E
F L O W ( G P D )
R E S I D E N T I A L 159,143 Persons 54.5 8,673,200
M O B I L E H O M E 4,399 Persons 30 131,900
H O T E L 649 Rooms 19.5 12,600
C O M M E R C I A L 16,289,742 SF 0.08 1,221,700
I N D U S T R I A L 7,087,044 SF 0.04 248,000
S C H O O L 38,365 Students 4.5 172,600
E X I S T I N G A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S 10,460,000
4-7
The quantity of persons is based on the existing population of 163,542. The number of students was based on the City’s GIS data, and the number of hotel rooms was based on the hotels within the existing service area. In order to compare hotel flows to flow monitoring that was performed during the COVID-19 California Stay Home Order, it was assumed that hotels were operating at half capacity. The City provided a dataset of the building footprints within the City, which was used to quantify the total area for both commercial and industrial facilities.
Table 4-5 summarizes the estimated flows for the sewersheds. These flows are estimates based on the wastewater flow factors shown in Table 4 -4. Table 4-5 also summarizes the percent difference of the estimated flows to the flow monitoring average values. Population densities per household and number of units per acre were classified into three categories (low, average, and high) based on 2020 Census Tract data. Certain areas of the City have higher population densities per household than other areas of the City, as shown as a heatmap on Figure 4 -2.
Classifying the population densities into three categories allowed the flow projections for each sewershed to more accurately match what was measured during flow monitoring. Table 4-6 summarizes the breakdown of population and housing unit densities and the sewersheds where these densities were applied.
T A B L E 4 - 5 . E X I S T I N G A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S B Y S E W E R S H E D T A B L E 4 - 6 . E X I S T I N G F L O W F A C T O R S
L O W A V E R A G E H I G H
L O W D E N S I T Y 4.5 UNITS/ACRE 6.5 UNITS/ACRE 8.0 UNITS/ACRE A V E R A G E D E N S I T Y 8.0 UNITS/ACRE 11.75 UNITS/ACRE 15 UNITS/ACRE H I G H D E N S I T Y 15 UNITS/ACRE 16.75 UNITS/ACRE 24 UNITS/ACRE H O U S E H O L D S I Z E 2.7 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD 3.2 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD 5.8 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD S E W E R S H E D S 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, & 18 5, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 16, & 17 6, 11, 12, 13, & 14
For sewersheds that saw higher flow monitoring values than what was predicted, it is likely representative of groundwater infiltration or minimal amounts of rainfall dependent inflow or infiltration. Since the rainfall event during the flow monitoring peri od was not significant, it is likely that these higher values can be attributed to groundwater infiltration. Based on the City’s observation, this is likely in Sewershed 12 & 13 since it is known that Carr Lake experiences inflow and infiltration. Sewershe ds 14 and 15 may be seeing infiltration from upstream inverted siphons and crossings at the reclamation ditch.
Before review of the flow monitoring results, it was assumed that Sewershed 11 was upstream of Sewershed 8 based on the City’s GIS data; howeve r, the flow monitoring data was much higher than what was estimated for Sewershed 8. The survey data confirmed that flows from Sewershed 11, and upstream Sewersheds 1 and 2, are conveyed into the 24-inch line on Davis Road just upstream of the flow monitoring location 8. Therefore, the flows from Sewershed 8 include upstream Sewersheds 1, 2, and 11.
Sewersheds 16 & 17 were combined based on the two 24 -inch parallel lines conveying flow through the agricultural fields south of Blanco Road and into SAPS. A dditionally, Sewersheds 12 & 13 were combined since they are both upstream of Lake Street Lift Station.
Table 4-5. Existing Average Daily Flows By Sewershed
Tributary Area
Low Density
Residential
Housing (acres)
Medium Density
Residential Housing
(acres)
High Density
Residential
Housing (acres)
Number of
Mobile Home
Units Housing Units
Estimated
Residential
Population
Density
Estimated
Residential
Population Density
(Mobile Homes)
Estimated
Residential
Population gpd
Estimated # of
Hotel Rooms gpd Estimated # of Students gpd
Commercial
Facilities
(minus schools
& hotels)
(sq. ft) gpd
Industrial Facilities
(sq. ft) gpd
SubTotal
Average
Estimated
Flow (gpd)
Average Flow
Monitoring (gpd)
Individual
Sites
Percent
Difference
from Flow
Monitoring
Combined Sites
Percent
Difference from
Flow Monitoring
Site 01: Sucre 66 19 92 454 2,643 6,929 1,243 8,172 414,835 23 449 2,621 11,795 255,160 19,137 42,762 1,497 447,712 534,842 -16% -16% Site 02: Harden 136 20 17 0 1,002 2,667 0 2,667 145,299 0 0 550 2,475 515,409 38,656 0 0 186,430 190,354 -2% -2% Site 03: Laurel 134 0 26 0 973 2,591 0 2,591 141,180 0 0 3,097 13,937 155,585 11,669 770 27 166,812 198,404 -16% -16% Site 04: Constitution 193 139 16 0 2,133 5,679 0 5,679 309,448 0 0 2,586 11,637 148,599 11,145 570 20 332,250 414,180 -20% -20% Site 05: Ranch View 112 38 23 0 1,554 4,918 0 4,918 267,958 0 0 5,237 23,567 186,581 13,994 0 0 305,518 368,611 -17% -17% Site 06: Alisal 77 50 0 0 1,303 7,555 0 7,555 411,614 0 0 1,647 7,412 16,359 1,227 785 27 420,280 291,616 44% 44% Site 07: Eucalyptus 269 23 45 0 2,759 8,731 0 8,731 475,735 0 0 2,863 12,884 386,979 29,023 8,507 298 517,939 486,224 7% 21% Site 08 Davis 42 4 8 0 452 1,430 0 1,430 77,919 0 0 250 1,125 1,270,016 95,251 573 20 174, 315 369,136 -53% 9% Site 09: El Rancho 76 0 0 0 338 900 0 900 49,057 56 1,092 0 0 11,288 847 0 0 50,995 46,255 10% 10% Site 10: Madison 35 0 0 0 226 714 0 714 38,930 0 0 0 0 323,801 24,285 0 0 63,215 67,699 -7% -7% Site 11: Cherokee 42 72 70 113 3,117 17,423 655 18,079 968,982 0 0 0 0 1,253,670 94,025 10,655 373 1,063,381 1,156,241 -8% -10% Site 12+13: Lake St 24 + Lake St 30 322 178 62 320 6,773 37,427 1,856 39,283 2,094,949 146 2,837 5,487 24,692 407,446 30,558 116,108 4,064 2,157,100 2,468,446 -13% 13% Site 14: Bridge 401 31 30 0 4,162 24,140 0 24,140 1,315,270 0 0 3,265 14,693 670,740 50,306 11,116 389 1,380,657 1,518,925 -9% -10% Site 15: Sanborn 121 42 12 0 1,475 4,667 0 4,667 254,306 134 2,603 595 2,678 2,835,674 212,676 4,166,874 145,841 618,103 651,073 -5% 9% Site 16 + Site 17: Hitchcock 372 145 54 0 5,007 15,846 0 15,846 863,389 138 2,691 6,731 30,290 3,910,339 293,275 887,713 31,070 1,220,714 1,364,436 -11% -11% Site 18: Hitchcock 220 54 57 0 2,211 5,885 0 5,885 320,639 14 273 1,190 5,355 1,344,877 100,866 1,237,867 43,325 470,458 463,542 1% 7% Not Monitored 385 115 123 255 4,614 11,605 679 12,284 652,687 139 2,711 2,923 13,154 2,597,219 194,791 602,744 21,096 884,438 Not Monitored N/A N/A System Total 3,003 930 635 1,142 44,153 159,109 4,433 163,542 8,802,197 6 49 12,656 39,042 175,689 16,289,742 1,221,731 7,087,044 24 8,047 10,460,000 4-8
4-9
P E A K I N G F A C T O R A N A L Y S I S
The following section defines some of the terminology commonly used to describe and analyze wastewater flows.
Average Daily Flow (ADF)
ADF is the average daily wastewater flow in a collection system. For this study, the ADF is based on the mean of the daily flows to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) for the years 2015-2017, as shown in Table 4-2. Based on this data, the ADF for the City is 10.46 MGD.
Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow (MDDWF)
MDDWF reflects the maximum day flow rate typically seen during the peak summer months. The City of Salinas peak flows in the summer are likely influenced due to the increase in population of farm workers in the area.
According to the Draft April 2018 Farmworker Housing Study and Action Plan for Salinas Valley and Pajaro Valley, agricultural employment increases over an eight-month period of April through November. This same study found that approximately 20% of the total population for the Salinas and Pajaro Valleys are migrant, non -permanent residents. Assuming the City’s population increases by 20% during these peak harvesting months would mean an increase of approximately 31,600 people. Using a flow factor of 54.5 gallons per person per day (see Table 4 -4), wastewater flows would increase by approximately 1,722,200 GPD, for a total domestic average flow during these peak months of 12.2 MGD. The historical MDDWF recorded in the SAPS data provided was 13.9 MGD on April 24, 2015. This results in a multiplier to increase the ADF, or peaking factor, of 1.33.
The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master plan also used historical SAPS data to calculate a dry weather peaking factor of
1.6, with the assumption that the peaking factor would approach 1.5 as flows increase in the future. For the purposes of this study, a peaking factor of 1.5 will be used to calculate MDDWF. This is al so consistent with California Title 22 Drinking Water Regulations recommendation of using 1.5 as a multiplier to average daily water usage to calculate the maximum day demand. The MDDWF for the City is 15.69 MGD.
Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow (PHDWF)
An important design consideration for wastewater collection system facilities is the PHDWF. PHDWF is important to understand as it may govern the design of pump stations and sewer mains. Hourly measurements at SAPS were unavailable for this peak flow analysis; th erefore, peak flow was estimated based on flow monitoring that was conducted March 5 -6, 2021 to April 20 -21, 2021. Since there was little to no rain during this time, the PHDWF would not include rainfall dependent inflow and infiltration flow contributions to the collection system. Figure 4- 3 shows the relative residential and commercial hourly flows, or diurnal curves, for the collection system during the flow monitoring period described above. The diurnal curves in Figure 4 -3 show the average dry weath er peaking factor is 2.0 and 1.9 for collection systems serving residential and commercial areas, respectively. The PHDWF factor during max day, dry weather flow is equal to the diurnal peaking factor multiplied by the MDDWF factor, which equates to 3.0 for residential and 2.9 for commercial.
Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow (PHWWF)
PHWWF is the maximum flow rate that occurs in a single hour during wet weather, which is defined as a significant rain event. Similar to PHDWF, PHWWF can also govern the design of th e sewage collection system as it may represent the maximum flow rate that the collection system must convey. PHWWF is calculated by multiplying the ADF by the diurnal peaking factor and adding the wet weather flow component typically found during flow monitoring conducted during one or more significant rainfall events. Since the flow monitoring conducted for this study did not occur during any significant rain events, the PHWWF cannot be accurately calculated. The following section summarizes the peak unit rainfall dependent infiltration and inflow (RDII) flow factors that were analyzed to approximate the peak wet weather flow for this study. 4-10
I N F I L T R A T I O N A N D I N F L O W
Infiltration and Inflow (I/I) can cause significant issues in collection systems and wastewater treatment plants. The I/I of surface and ground water into a sewer system can result in peak flows that exceed dry weather flow conditions. For the purposes of this study, these terms are defined as follows:
Infiltration is the water entering a sewer system and service connections from groundwater, through such means as defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls. Infiltration does not include inflow and is relatively constant over a period of days, weeks, or even months as high groundwater conditions persist.
Inflow is the water discharged into a sewer system and service connections from such sources as roof drains, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole covers, cross connections from storm sewers, catch basins, storm water, surface water runoff, or drainage. Inflow does not include infiltration. Inflow occurs and may vary more rapidly than infiltration with rainfall conditions. Sewer collection flows rising and falling within minutes or hours of a severe storm events are typically associated to the occurrence of inflow.
In order to check for rainfall -dependent I/I (RDII) during the flow monitoring period, rain data was obta ined through weather stations monitored by the California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS). CIMIS Station 116 Salinas North was identified as the closest rain gauge to the City. Over the entire duration of the flow monitoring performed for this study (48 days), a total of 1.17 inches were recorded in the first 14 days with a maximum of less than 0.3 inches per day at Station 116. This is considered to be less than the one-year recurrence interval storm event. Graphs of the daily flow at each monitoring location versus daily rain totals are also provided on Figures 4-4 to 4-21.
The rainfall recorded during the sewer flow monitoring does not provide enough information to determine wet weather peaking factors from the flow monitoring period. Th erefore, historical rainfall events and the wet weather peaking factors from the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan were reviewed and summarized in the following sections.
Historical Rainfall Dependent Infiltration and Inflow
M1W provided instantaneous flow at SAPS for February 2017. Data for this month is valuable because a total of
2.15 inches fell over a 24-hour period on February 20, 2017 and several rainfall events occurred on the days prior, increasing the potential for infiltration into the sewer based on the rain saturating the ground. The instantaneous flow at SAPS showed a max reading of 31.5 MGD on February 20, 2017. Figure 4 -22 graphs the instantaneous reading at SAPS for the wet weather day (February 20, 2017), the hourly precipitation on the wet weather day, and the instantaneous readings on February 27, a similar weekday with no rainfall events on or leading up to the day.
By comparing the maximum recorded flow at SAPS, 31.5 MGD, to the average daily flow of 10.46 MGD, a PHWWF peaking factor of 3.0 was determined for this storm event. Although this information confirms the City’s collection system does experience RDII, it does not provide insight into where RDII is occurring because the monitoring location at SAPS is at the most downstream point of the collection system. Additionally, this data does not provide the extent to which RDII may be occurring because it is only one data point. Therefore, this study will also use the wet weather flow parameters described in the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.
4-11
2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan RDII Peak Unit Flow Rates The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan used the flow monitoring data and measured rainfall events occurring during January to February 2007 and 2008 to develop wet weather p arameters for different sewersheds. As described above, the portion of the sewer flow attributed to each rainfall event was calculated as the measured sewer flow minus the dry weather base flow. With this data, linear regression equations were used to dete rmine; (1) the percentage of storm volume that reaches the sewer collection system; (2) the RDII peak flow to RDII volume ratio; and (3) the runoff coefficient for RDII in each sewershed. These wet weather parameters were applied to the 5 - year, 6-hour storm and 10-year, 6-hour storm to calculate peak RDII factors. Discussion of the methods used are available in Appendix B of the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.
These three wet weather parameters were not verified since the sewer flow monitoring was not provided during the 2007-2008 monitoring period; however, the peak RDII unit flows from these parameters were correlated to the sewersheds in this study and used to determine the peak wet weather flow.
Table 4-7 provides the peak RDII unit flow rate s and total flow estimates for the 10 -year, 6-hour design storm.
Sewersheds that were not part of the 2007 and 2008 metered data were assigned an RDII unit flow of 2,000 gpapd for the 10-year, 6-hour storm, based on the 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan recommendations.
Since these values were developed in 2007 -2008, it is still recommended that the City complete an in -depth I/I evaluation of the entire collection system. Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine the best time to complete this evaluation as most California counties, including Monterey County, are experiencing extreme drought conditions.
The I/I evaluation would also include an update to the wet weather flow scenarios used in the hydraulic model and an evaluation of any additional CIPs. This recommended I /I evaluation is included as an existing CIP in Ch. 7 of this report and the timing of the project will be dependent on a significant wet weather year.
4-12
T A B L E 4 - 7 . P E A K W E T W E A T H E R F L O W F O R 1 0- Y E A R , 6 - H O U R S T O R M
S E W E R S H E D
C O N T R I B U T I N G
S E W E R A R EA
P E A K R D I I
U N I T F L O W
( G P A P D )
P E A K R D I I
F L O W
( G P D )
P E A K W E T
W E A T H E R
F L O W ( G P D )
1 373 1,200 447,600 895,320
2 224 2,000 448,500 634,930
3 245 2,000 490,600 657,420
4 453 2,000 905,600 1,237,850
5 274 2,000 547,500 853,020
6 151 2,000 301,200 721,490
7 440 2,100 923,500 1,441,440
8 195 1,200 234,400 408,720
9 85 2,000 170,800 221,800
10 101 2,000 201,400 264,620
11 329 1,200 394,400 1,457,790
1 2 & 1 3 840 2,900 1,427,300 3,584,410
14 590 3,000 1,770,600 3,15 1,260
15 870 2,100 1,826,000 2,444,110
1 6 & 1 7 1,037 2,000 2,074,500 3,295,220
18 591 2,000 1,181,700 1,652,160
N o t
M o n i t o r e d
975 2,000 1,949,500 2,833,940
T O T A L 7,77 3 15,295,100 25,755,500
4-13
F U T U R E W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S
T A B L E 4 - 8 . A D D I T I O N A L F U T U R E A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S B Y G R O W T H A R E A Projection of wastewater flow is tied closely to population projections and anticipated development discussed in Chapter 2. Table 4 -8 provides a summary of the future flows for each growth area. Although it is assumed that water conservation measures will be taken, such as low flow plumbing fixtures for future developments, the future flows are determined by using the existing flow factors identified in Table 4-4. The total additional future flow to the system is estimated to be 7.3 MGD.
Since there are large industrial areas projected for the City, a conservative value of 0.10 gallons/day/square feet is used to account for future industrial flows. This unit is based on historical water use data seen for high industrial users. Note, the industrial flows are for the domestic flows from industrial facilities, not industrial wastewater from industrial facili ties, such as wash water. The industrial wastewater is anticipated to flow to the industrial wastewater treatment facility via the industrial sewer collection system.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Ruggeri -Jensen-Azar and Associates prepared the Sanitary Sew er System Analysis Report & Calculations for the planned Salinas-Ag Industrial Center. The sewer flow calculations for this analysis used the conservative value of 2,000 gpapd, identified in the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan for future industrial developments. Based on discussions with the City, the sewer flows modeled for the Salinas-Ag Industrial Center in this SSMPU are based on the above value of 0.10 gallons/day/building square feet.
The peaking factors noted in this chapter were used to estimate future maximum day and peak hour wet weather flows for the future condition. City standards recommend a peak Rainfall-Dependent Infiltration and Inflow (RDII) unit flow of 500 gallons per acre per day (gpapd), based on new plastic sewer pipes. This RDII unit flow was applied to the total growth area of 4,960 acres to calculate the additional peak wet weather flow from future conditions.
Table 4-9 provides a summary of the collection system’s existing and future flows.
T A B L E 4 - 9 . E X I S T I N G A N D F U T U R E F L O W S U M M A R Y
F L O W C O N D I T I O N
E X I S T I N G
F L O W ( G P D )
F U T U R E
F L O W ( G P D ) N O T E S
A V E R A G E D A I L Y
F L O W ( A D F )
10,460,000 17, 715,200
Additional Future
Flow= 7,255,160 gpd
(see Table 4 -8)
M A X I M U M D A Y
D R Y W E A T H E R
F L O W ( M D D W F )
15,690,000 26,572,800 Based on MDDWF
peaking factor of 1.5
P E A K H O U R W E T
W E A T H E R F L O W
( P H W W F ) 1 0- Y R ,
6 - H R S T O R M
25, 755,500 35, 605,300
Based on peak RDII unit
factors for the 10 year, 6 -
hour storm event for
existing; Based on 500
gpapd for future areas
Table 4-8. Additional Future Average Daily Flows By Growth Area City Growth Area
Low Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
Medium Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
High Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
Mixed Use
Residential
Dwelling Units gpd
Commercial &
Mixed Use
Facilities (sq. ft) gpd
Industrial
Facilities (sq. ft) gpd
Estimated #
of Students gpd
SubTotal
Estimated Future
Flow (gpd)
Focused Growth: Abbott Street 24 109 -- 242 74,791 3,425,027 256,877 819,724 81,972 -- 0 413,640 Focused Growth: East Alisal Street/East Market Street -- 227 91 -- 63,518 2,327,648 174,574 -- 0 -- 0 238,090 Focused Growth: Laurel Drive at North Main Street -- -- -- 262 52,336 3,212,100 240,907 -- 0 -- 0 293,240 Focused Growth: North Main Street/Soledad Street 33 171 62 202 93,130 2,554,430 191,582 130,276 13,028 -- 0 297,740 Focused Growth: South Main Street -- -- -- 283 56,434 4,373,795 328,035 -- 0 -- 0 384,470 Focused Growth Subtotal 57 507 153 989 340,208 15,893,000 1,191,975 950,000 95,000 0 0 1,627,180 Future Growth: Central Area Specific Plan 1,367 1,359 1,185 -- 779,927 489,700 36,728 -- 0 4,033 18,149 834,800 Future Growth: West Area Specific Plan 1361 1,803 1,085 91 865,477 571,500 42,863 -- 0 2,354 10,593 918,930 Future Growth: East Area Specific Plan 2,699 1,669 263 121 947,786 2,898,291 217,372 -- 0 -- 0 1,165,160 Future Growth: East Area 1,305 1,221 147 157 564,215 1,493,396 112,005 4,997,912 499,791 -- 0 1,176,010 Future Growth: Southeast Area -- -- -- -- 0 -- 0 4,672,741 467,274 -- 0 467,270 Future Growth: West Boronda FGA 39 -- -- -- 7,770 587,113 44,033 1,102,347 110,235 -- 0 162,040 Future Growth Subtotal 6,771 6,052 2,680 369 3,165,175 6,040,000 453,000 10,773,000 1,077,300 6,387 28,742 4,724,210 Target Area B -- -- -- -- 0 87,120 6,534 1,502,820 150,282 -- 0 156,820 Target Area F -- -- -- -- 0 87,120 6,534 -- 0 -- 0 6,530 Target Area K -- -- -- -- 0 250,470 18,790 1,570,338 157,030 -- 0 175,820 Target Area L -- -- -- -- 0 620,730 46,550 -- 0 -- 0 46,550 Target Area N -- -- -- -- 0 337,590 25,320 -- 0 -- 0 25,320 Target Area V -- -- -- -- 0 810,448 60,780 -- 0 -- 0 60,780 Target Area Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 2,193,478 164,508 3,073,158 307,312 0 0 471,820 Bolsa Knolls 625 -- -- -- 90,651 68,418 5,130 -- 0 -- 0 95,780 Salinas Ag-Industrial Center -- -- -- -- 0 -- 0 3,361,743 336,174 -- 0 336,170 System Total 7,453 6,559 2,833 1,358 3,596,034 24,194,896 1,814,613 18,157,901 1,815,786 6,387 28,742 7,255,160 4-14
#*
#*
#* #*
#*
#*#*
#*#*
#*
#*
#*#*#*
#*
#*#*#*
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6#7
#8
#9
#10
#11
#12 #13#14
#15
#16
#17
#18
Legend
#* Monitoring Location
Not Monitored
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 4-1
FLOW MONITORING
LOCATION & SEWERSHEDS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Legend
City Boundary
Population Density
0 0-2.7 persons/household
2.7-3.2 persons/household
3.2-5.8 persons/household
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 4-2
POPULATION DENSITY HEATMAP
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
4-17
0.00 0.25
0.50 0.75
1.00 1.25
1.50 1.75
2.00 2.25
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
12:00 AM
P E A K I N G F A C T O R
T I M E
F I G U R E 4 - 3 . D I U R N A L C U R V E
R E S I D E N T I A L
A V E R A G E
C O M M E R C I A L
4-18
A V E R A G E
5 3 4 , 8 4 2 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
480,000
500,000
520,000
540,000
560,000
580,000
600,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 4 . S E W E R S H E D 1 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW R AI N
FL O W
AV E R AGE FL O W
4-19
A V E R A G E
1 9 0 , 3 5 4 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 5 . S E W E R S H E D 2 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW 4-20
A V E R A G E
1 9 8 , 4 0 4 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
300,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 6 . S E W E R S H E D 3 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW 4-21
A V E R A G E
4 1 4 , 1 8 0 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
480,000
500,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 7 . S E W E R S H E D 4 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW 4-22
A V E R A G E
3 6 8 , 6 1 1 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 260,000
280,000
300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M TuW Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 8 . S E W E R S H E D 5 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW 4-23
A V E R A G E
2 9 1 , 6 1 6 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 9 . S E W E R S H E D 6 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L OW 4-24
A V E R A G E
7 7 7 , 8 4 0 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 700,000
720,000
740,000
760,000
780,000
800,000
820,000
840,000
860,000
880,000
900,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 0 . S E W E R S H E D 7 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-25
A V E R A G E
1 , 7 1 5 , 7 3 1 G P D
0 0.5
1 1,400,000
1,500,000
1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
2,000,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 1 . S E W E R S H E D 8 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-26
A V E R A G E
4 6 , 2 5 5 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 2 . S E W E R S H E D 9 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-27
A V E R A G E
6 7 , 6 9 9 G P D
0 0.2
0.4 0.6
0.8 1
0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
110,000
120,000
130,000
140,000
150,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 3 . S E W E R S H E D 1 0 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-28
A V E R A G E
1 , 8 8 1 , 4 3 7 ( G P D )
0 0.25
0.5 0.75
1 1,600,000
1,650,000
1,700,000
1,750,000
1,800,000
1,850,000
1,900,000
1,950,000
2,000,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 4 . S E W E R S H E D 1 1 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-29
A V E R A G E
5 8 3 , 7 3 4 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
700,000
750,000
800,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 5 . S E W E R S H E D 1 2 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-30
A V E R A G E
1 , 8 8 4 , 7 1 2 G P D
0 0.25
0.5 0.75
1 1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
2,000,000
2,100,000
2,200,000
2,300,000
2,400,000
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W T h F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 6 . S E W E R S H E D 1 3 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-31
A V E R A G E
1 , 7 1 7 , 3 2 9 G P D
0 0.25
0.5 0.75
1 1,500,000
1,550,000
1,600,000
1,650,000
1,700,000
1,750,000
1,800,000
1,850,000
1,900,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 7 . S E W E R S H E D 1 4 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-32
A V E R A G E
1 , 4 2 8 , 9 1 3 G P D
0 0.25
0.5 0.75
1 1,100,000
1,200,000
1,300,000
1,400,000
1,500,000
1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
3/6/21
3/7/21
3/8/21
3/9/21
3/10/21
3/11/21
3/12/21
3/13/21
3/14/21
3/15/21
3/16/21
3/17/21
3/18/21
3/19/21
3/20/21
3/21/21
3/22/21
3/23/21
3/24/21
3/25/21
3/26/21
3/27/21
3/28/21
3/29/21
3/30/21
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 8 . S E W E R S H E D 1 5 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-33
A V E R A G E
4 2 8 , 6 8 9 G P D
0 0.25
0.5 0.75
1 250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 9 . S E W E R S H E D 1 6 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-34
A V E R A G E
9 3 5 , 7 4 7 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 840,000
860,000
880,000
900,000
920,000
940,000
960,000
980,000
1,000,000
1,020,000
1,040,000
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 2 0 . S E W E R S H E D 1 7 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-35
A V E R A G E
1 , 8 9 2 , 4 5 5 G P D
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
3/31/21
4/1/21
4/2/21
4/3/21
4/4/21
4/5/21
4/6/21
4/7/21
4/8/21
4/9/21
4/10/21
4/11/21
4/12/21
4/13/21
4/14/21
4/15/21
4/16/21
4/17/21
4/18/21
4/19/21
4/20/21
W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 2 1 . S E W E R S H E D 1 8 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D FL O W 4-36
0 0.05
0.1 0.15
0.2 0.25
0.3 0.00
5.00 10.00
15.00 20.00
25.00 30.00
35.00 12:00:06 AM
12:36:43 AM
1:07:47 AM
1:40:42 AM
2:11:35 AM
2:42:19 AM
3:14:12 AM
3:54:23 AM
4:28:02 AM
4:56:52 AM
5:26:38 AM
5:57:35 AM
6:36:14 AM
7:15:20 AM
7:39:32 AM
8:06:43 AM
8:30:18 AM
8:51:46 AM
9:14:41 AM
9:37:47 AM
10:00:18 AM
10:23:57 AM
10:46:48 AM
11:10:00 AM
11:36:25 AM
12:01:11 PM
12:24:17 PM
12:48:59 PM
1:11:52 PM
1:35:05 PM
2:02:05 PM
2:26:44 PM
2:48:52 PM
3:10:27 PM
3:31:38 PM
3:54:58 PM
4:17:19 PM
4:41:24 PM
5:04:56 PM
5:29:54 PM
6:03:48 PM
6:32:59 PM
7:02:12 PM
7:36:22 PM
8:08:26 PM
8:41:00 PM
9:10:31 PM
9:38:34 PM
10:08:24 PM
10:36:39 PM
11:03:32 PM
11:34:14 PM
R A I N ( I N )
F L O W ( M G D )
T I M E
F I G U R E 4 - 2 2 . F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 7
D R Y W E AT H E R V S W E T W E AT H E R F L O W
R A I N
R A I N D A Y ( 0 2 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 7 )
D R Y D A Y ( 2 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 7 )
5-1
C H AP T E R 5
L I F T STAT I ON E VA LUAT I ON
This Chapter presents the evaluation of the City’s lift stations for their ability to meet existing and future wastewater flow demands. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.
L I F T S T A T I O N B A C K G R O U N D
The City owns and operates ten (10) lift stations located throughout the collection system. The City also maintains the Vista Nueva Lift Station under an assessment district. All lift station force mains tie into the City’s gravity system for conveyance to SAPS. City staff conducts regular maintenance of the City’s lift stations. In 2018, staff initiated a Sup ervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) program to monitor all lift stations. This SCADA program monitors motor run times and sends an alarm to staff directly if there are any operational issues at the lift stations. City staff are unable to operate the lift stations from the SCADA system, only monitor.
The tenants at Harris Place Industrial Park have requested that the City assume operations and maintenance of the privately-owned lift station. The City is currently preparing a separate study to de termine the feasibility of operating the Harris Place Lift Station. The review of this lift station is being completed under a separate report.
Fluid Resource Management (FRM), a sub-consultant to Wallace Group, conducted evaluations of the City’s eleven lift stations and the lift station at Harris Place. Very little information is available or was able to be collected by FRM during their site inspection of the Harris Place Lift Station. Table 5-1 provides a summary of each lift station.
Additional information for each lift station is discussed below. All lift stations are shown on Figure 5-1.
As discussed in Ch. 3, the City also receives wastewater flows from ten (10) private lift stations located throughout the City and shown on Figure 3-3. These private lift stations are not part of this lift station evaluation.
Table 5-1. Lift Station Summary
Airport (Moffett) Carpenter Hall De La Torre Harkins R oad Lake Street 4. Las Casitas 5. Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva 5.
Submersible Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry P it Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Submersible Flygt Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless ITT Flygt Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smit h/Loveless Smith/Loveless ITT Flygt 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
10 30 5 5 30 10 15 30 7.5 10 3
Date Constructed 1981 Unknown 1964 Unknown 1967 1971 1964 U nknown 1967 Unknown 1990 Pump Model # 3127.090-181044,
3127.090-5766
MU237600-03/10-
01, MU237600-
03/10-02
6412746, 6412763 66N40657,
66N40658
9080091,
980150
122190009,
122190011
3Y6579005A13
DQ
7907700L-1,
791170C-1
67541123,
67541125
99-1024B-2, 99-
1024B-1
9640005,
9640095
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
208 230 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240
Speed (rpm) 1740 1175 1165 870 860 1200 1760 1200 1155 1300 1740 Across the line
contactor VFD Altivar 660 Across the line
contactor
Across the line
contactor VFD 1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start Across the line contactor
Across the line
contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the line
contactor
gpm 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 150 500 1,530 400 400 175
TDH (ft) --- --- 37 18 --- 50 58 433 32 50 54
Rated 550 2,250 200 350 2,400 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Measured 467 1,600 342 228 2,400 357 --- 1,489 195 564 220 Rated 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Measured 448 1,600 354 281 2,600 345 --- 1,661 218 491 79 Rated --- --- --- --- 2,800 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Measured --- --- --- --- 2,800 --- --- --- --- --- ---
yes yes no no yes yes yes yes no yes no
yes no yes unsafe yes yes yes yes unsafe yes yes
yes no no no yes no no no no no yes, 4"
no peeling no no yes no no yes no yes no
6 7 4 4 5.25 4 4 8 4 6 6
--- --- --- --- 25 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Wet Well Surface Elevation (ft) 63.3 50.8 55.8 61.4 54.8 53.2 42.0 78.8 55.4 56.1 51.0
48.30 20.8 41.3 43.42 14.75 32.2 20 59.3 30.4 21.57 35
15 30 14.5 18 40.00 21 22 19.5 25 34.5 16
Est. Wet Well Capacity (gallons) 6. 3,170 10,898 1,372 1,692 26,247 1,410 1,879 6,388 2,350 5,28 5 3,382 Low Alarm Not listed 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.1 Not listed 0.4 1.5 0.1 0 .2 Not listed Off 3.0 2.0 1.7 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 3.5 1.8 1.3 1.0
Lead On 4.0 5.6 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 6.5 4.5 3.3 5.0
Lag On 4.5 6.0 3.8 4.3 3.2 4.1 3.5 7.0 5.0 3.5 7.0
Last On --- --- --- --- 4.2 --- --- --- --- --- ---
High Alarm 13.5 8.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.8 4.0 8.5 6.0 4.5 7.0 211 1,036 169 188 687 179 141 1,128 254 423 846
3,170 2,015 442 376 4,811 1,410 338 2,632 555 909 #VALUE! 8 12 6 6 12 8 6 10 6 6 4
PVC DI DI DI DI AC DI DI DI DI PVC
3,706 47 588 300 167 1,035 920 1,128 386 82 378
55.2 25.8 49.3 48.4 37.08 36.49 27.50 71.80 45.00 26.57 48.80
59.3 40.3 58.4 56.9 41.00 88.23 49.07 88.19 54.78 46.73 62.00
8.0 17.5 15.4 11.5 24.5 54.4 27.6 25.4 22.6 23.9 26.0
Lift Station
Type
Voltage
Horsepower (HP), each
Number of Pumps
Force Main Total Static Head (feet)
Force Main End Elevation (feet)
Wet Well Width (ft)
Wet Well Set Points
(feet)
1 Wet Well Bottom Elevation (ft)
Flow (pump3) (GPM)
Wet Well Operating Volume (gal) 2
Wet Well Maximum Volume (gal) 3
Wet Well Depth (ft)
Wet Well Diameter or Length (ft)
Portable Generator Power Receptacle
Force Main Material
Force Main Start Elevation (feet)
Phase
Motor Controller/VFD
Flow (pump1) (GPM)
Flow (pump2) (GPM)
Pump Manufacturer
Permanent Standby Generator
Pump Design Point
Bypass Capabilities
Wet Pit Coating
Force Main Diameter (inches)
Force Main Length (feet)
Table Notes:
NA - Not Available
1. Information provided by FRM site visit conducted 4/9/2021.
2. Wet well operating volume calculated based on operating range from Pump Off to Lead On.
3. Wet well maximum volume calculated based on maximum desired operating range (Low Alarm to High Alarm).
4. Lake Street has two discharge force mains. Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. FM. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. FM. All three pumps have same sized motors and pumps even though they all have different serial/model numbers (Personal Communication Doyle McFarland 5/5/2022).
5. Wet well high level alarm setting provided by Gary Gabriel email 5/12/2022 for Las Casitas and Vista Nueva.
6. Wet well estimated capacity from station-specific ERP. 5-2
5-3
P H Y S I C A L D E S C R I P T I O N
Information regarding the physical characteristics of the eleven lift stations was provided by FRM and City staff, and some of the above ground features were visually reviewed by Wallace Group during site visits.
Airport (Moffett) Lift Station
Airport Lift Station is located in the northwest corner of the property at 730 La Guardia Street near the Municipal Airport and serves approximately 584 acres. This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial area south of the airport. This is a duplex lift station with submersible Flygt pumps each rated at 550 gpm. At over 3,700 lineal feet, the force main for this station has the longest run of the stations in the Salinas collection system. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch and bypass capabilities.
5-4
Carpenter Hall Lift Statio n
Carpenter Hall Lift Station is located near the center of the sewer collection system behind the building at 512 North Main Street. There is an access road off North Main Street near 422 North Main Street that leads to the lift station. This lift station c ollects flow from approximately 508 acres of residential, commercial, industrial properties, and schools in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 2,250 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but no power receptacle or bypass capabilities. This is the City’s second largest lift station.
De La Torre Lift Station
De La Torre Lift Station is located in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to 1222 De La Torre Street near the Municipal Airport. This lift station collects flow from approximately 10 acres of commercial properties and hotels in the area west of the airport. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 200 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has facilities to connect a portable backup generator but has no permanent electrical generator or bypass capabilities.
5-5
Harkins Road Lift Station
Harkins Road Lift Station is located near the southern boundary of the sewer collection system between Harkins Road and the railroad tracks. This lift station collects flow from approximately 146 acres of commercial and industrial properties in the area. This is a dupl ex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 350 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has no permanent electrical generator and an unsafe or transfer switch to connect a portable backup generator. It also has no bypass capabilities.
Lake Street Lift Station
Lake Street Lift Station is located near the center of the sewer collection system near Carr Lake at 146 East Rossi Street. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from a la rge upstream area of approximately 4,108 acres. This is a triplex lift station with Flygt pumps each rated at approximately 2,800 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch and bypass capabilities. This is the City’s largest lift station.
5-6
Las Casitas Lift Station
Las Casitas Lift Station is located near the eastern edge of the sewer collection system in a residential area at 721 Las Casitas Drive. This lift station collects flow from approximately 38 acres of residential properties and schools in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 150 gpm located in a dry pit.
This lift station has a dedicated ba ckup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities.
Mill Lake Lift Station
Mill Lake Lift Station is located near the western edge of the sewer collection system in a residential area at 81 Gardenia Drive. This lift station collects flow from approximately 43 acres of residential and commercial properties in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 500 gpm located in a dry pit.
This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities.
5-7
Santa Rita Lift Station
Santa Rita Lift Station is located near the northern edge of the sewer collection system in a commercial and residential area at 2021 Sucre Court. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstre am area of approximately 348 acres, including a small portion of flows through the Bolsa Knolls special assessment district . This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 1,530 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities. This is the City’s third largest lift station.
Spicer Lift Station
Spicer Lift Station is located in a commercial and industrial area at 59 Spicer Street. This lift station collects flow from approximately 79 acres of residential, commercial, industrial properties, and hotels in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 400 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station cannot have a dedicated backup generator and currently does not have a safe receptacle for a transfer switch and no bypass capabilities.
5-8
TP2 Lift Station
TP2 Lift Station is located near Spicer Lift Station in a commercial and industrial area at 650 Elvee Drive. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area of approximately 136 acres. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 400 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs set at 48 Hertz maximum output to control vibration. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but no bypass capabilities.
Vista Nueva Lift Station
Vista Nueva Lift Station is located near the western edge of the collection system in a residential area at 704 Garner Avenue. This lift station collects flow from the approximately 6 acres of residential properties in the area.
This is a duplex lift station with submersible Flygt pumps each rated at 175 gpm. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator but does have receptacle and transfer switch for a portable generator and bypass capabilities.
5-9
Harris Road Lift Station
Harris Lift Station is a private lift station located in the industrial area south of the sewer collection system at 1 Harris Place. This lift station collects flow from the industrial in the area. This is a duplex lift station with submersible pumps (manufacturer unknown) rated a t approximately 100 to 140 gpm. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities, but does have a receptacle and transfer switch for a portable generator..
5-10
H Y D R A U L I C P E R F O R M A N C E E V A L U A T I O N – E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S
The hydraulic characteristics of each lift station and deficiencies are noted below. Design criteria that apply to the lift stations and force mains are summarized as follows:
1. Force main velocities should be greater than 2 feet per second to maintain self -cleansing properties but less than 5 feet per second to minimize head loss and potential for water hammer.
2. Lift stations should be sized to convey peak flows with the largest pump out of service. Station “capacity” is therefore calculated with the largest pump out of service. This means that the lift station should be capable of operating with only one pump for a duplex station or two pumps for a triplex station.
3. Lift station wet wells should be sized to have adequate emergency storage.
4. Control settings within the wet well should be set to limit the number of pump starts per hour to acceptable limits as defined by the pump manufacturer. Larger lift stations may require a variable frequency drive to meet this requirement, especially those that receive direct discharge from other lift stations.
5. Lift stations should have a means of conveying peak flow during a power outage.
Force Main Hydraulic Evaluation
Force main friction loss was calculated to estimate total pump head and identify pump operating points based on manufacturer’s pump curves, data provided by City staff, and observed pumping rates. Pump curves for those lift stations which the City had available are included in Appendix D. The following items are of interest:
❖ Airport LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were potential problems with the pump motors. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 52% design rpm which could be caused by the worn motors.
❖ Carpenter Hall LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 62% design rpm which could be caused by the VFD.
❖ Pump curve for De La Torre is assumed similar to Harkins Rd. pump since manufacturer's data is unavailable and are adjusted to 125% to match the measured flows.
❖ Pump curve for Harkins Road is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were noted problems with the check valves.
❖ TP2 based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by City staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps.
Operating the pumps at full capacity would result in higher force main flow velocities and system losses.
❖ Pump curve for Vista Nueva is extrapolated from calibration data from City staff since manufacturer's data is unavailable.
The force mains and pumps were evaluated for hydraulic capacity. The physical condition of the lift station pumps and appurtenances was visually inspected by FRM with recommendations for fo llow up actions, which are provided in Appendix E.
5-11
Force main velocities were calculated based on estimated operating point of the lift station pumps. Calculated velocities are summarized in Table 5 -2. As noted above, force main velocities should be greater than 2 feet per second to maintain self -cleansing properties but less than 5 feet per second to minimize head loss and the potential for water hammer. It is recommended that lift stations with force main velocities greater than 5 feet per second should be evaluated further as part of any lift station upgrades. Based on the calculated velocities identified in Table 5-2, the velocities within the force mains for about half of the lift station are within acceptable ranges. However, the calculated velocities in the force mains for the following lift stations is of concern:
❖ Carpenter Hall Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velo city to be 8.5 and 14.8 feet per second, respectively. Reducing the pump output to 62% approximates the measured flow but still causes excessive force main velocity of 8.2 feet per second in duplex mode
❖ Harkins Road Lift Station operating in duplex mode c auses the force main velocity to be 5.2 feet per second, the upper limit of recommended maximum velocity.
❖ Lake Street Lift Station is the only triplex lift station in the system. Lake Street Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. force main. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. force main. Operating the lift station in simplex, duplex, and triplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velocities to be 7.4 feet per second for the 12” dia. force main, and 6.1 and 9.7 feet per second, respectively, for the 14” dia. force main.
❖ Las Casitas Lift Station pumps have a design rating of 150 gpm at 50 feet Total Dynamic Head (TDH).
However, the calculated and measured pumping rates are 395 gpm and 350 gpm, respectively. The force main flow velocity at the design pumping rate of 150 gpm is 1.5 fps. Although this is lower than the recommended minimum flow rate of 2 fps, the flow rate at 395 gpm is 2.5 fps, which is acceptable.
❖ Mill Lake Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be 5.8 and 7.1 feet per second, respectively.
❖ Santa Rita Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be 5.8 and 7.1 feet per second, respectively.
❖ TP2 Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velocity to be 8.4 and 11.9 feet per second, respectively. Reducing the pump output to 80% approximates the measured flow but still causes excessive force main velocity of 6.3 and 9 .2 feet per second in simplex and duplex modes, respectively.
❖ Vista Nueva Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be
5.4 and 6.4 feet per second, respectively.
Table 5-2 Force Main Evaluation
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett) 2.
Carpenter
Hall 3. De La Torre 4. Harkins
Road 5.
Lake Street
Simplex 6.
Lake Street
Duplex 6. Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 7. Vista Nueva 8.
Force Main Properties
Force Main Diameter inches 8 12 6 6 12 14 8 6 10 6 6 4
Hazen Williams C -- 140 110 110 110 110 110 130 110 110 110 110 140 Force Main Length
1. feet 3,821 163 703 415 282 282 1,150 1,035 1,243 501 197 493 Elevation Head feet 8.0 17.5 15.4 11.5 24.5 24.5 54.4 27.6 25 .4 22.6 23.9 26.0 Design Flows
Simplex Flow gpm 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 2,600 150 500 1,530 4 00 400 175 Velocity ft/sec 3.5 6.4 2.3 4.0 7.4 5.4 1.0 5.7 6.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 Estimated Pump Capacity
Simplex Flow gpm 640 1,600 345 370 2,600 -- 395 510 1,420 205 5 55 210 Velocity ft/sec 4.1 4.5 3.9 4.2 7.4 -- 2.5 5.8 5.8 2.3 6.3 5.4 Friction Loss
1 ft 26.7 1.3 9.9 6.7 5.7 -- 3.8 30.1 20.0 2.7 6.7 12.8 Total Pump Head ft 34.7 18.8 25.3 18.2 30.2 -- 58.2 57.7 45.4 25.3 30.6 38.8 Duplex Flow gpm 780 2,900 395 455 -- 2,950 560 630 1,740 260 81 0 250 Velocity ft/sec 5.0 8.2 4.5 5.2 -- 6.1 3.6 7.1 7.1 3.0 9.2 6.4 Friction Loss
1 ft 38.5 4.0 12.8 9.8 -- 3.4 7.2 44.6 29.1 4.2 13.5 17.7 Total Pump Head ft 46.5 21.5 28.1 21.3 -- 27.9 61.6 72.1 54.6 26.8 37.4 43.7 Triplex Flow gpm -- -- -- -- -- 4,650 -- -- -- -- -- -- Velocity ft/sec -- -- -- -- -- 9.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
Friction Loss
1 ft -- -- -- -- -- 7.9 -- -- -- -- -- --
Total Pump Head ft -- -- -- -- -- 32.4 -- -- -- -- -- --
1. Minor losses are
included in the friction
loss calculations for all
lift stations as an
assumed equivalent
length of 115 LF. This is
Minor Losses for assumed LS FM
item size
equivalent pipe length quantity total length
90d elbow 8 9.8 3 29.4
check valve 8 74 1 74
gate valve 8 2.7 1 2.7
tee 10 4.6 2 9.2
TOTAL 115.3
Table Notes
na - Not Available
1. Minor losses are included in the friction loss calculations for all lift stations as an assumed equivalent length of 115 LF. This approximates losses for 1 check valve, 3 elbows, 2 tees, and 1 gate valve in the force main.
2. Airport LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were potential problems with the pump motors. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 52% design rpm which could be caused by the worn motors.
3. Carpenter Hall LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 62% design rpm which could be caused by the VFD.
4. Pump curve for De La Torre is assumed similar to Harkins Rd. Pump since manufacturer's data is unavailable and are adjusted to 125% to match the measured flows.
5. Pump curve for Harkins Road is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were noted problems with the check valves.
6. Lake Street Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. FM. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. FM. All three pumps have same sized motors and pumps even though they all have different serial/model numbers (Personal Communication Doyle McFarland 5/5/2022).
7. TP2 based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by city staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps.
8. Pump curve for Vista Nueva is from calibration data from city staff since manufacturer's data is unavailable. 5-12
5-13
Existing Lift Station Inflow
Table 5-3 provides a summary of existing flows for each lift station based on the unit flow factors for contributing land uses as described in Chapter 4. The calculated flows for each lift station represent gravity flow to the lift station from its tributary area. Lake Street Lift Station also receives flow from the Las Casitas and Vista Nueva Lift Stations. These flows are added to the calculated land -based gravity flows in Table 5 -3 in the row labeled “w/ Simplex Flow.”
Pumping Capacity Evaluation
Lift stations should be sized to convey peak hour dry weather (PHDW) flows with the largest pump out of service.
Station “firm capacity” is therefore calculated with the largest pump out of service. This means that the lift station should be capable of operating with only one pump for a duplex station or two pumps for a triplex station.
Table 5-4 provides a comparison of lift station flows with the largest pump not operating, that is simplex operation for all lift stations except Lake Street Lift Station which is shown for duplex operation since this is the only triplex lift station in the system. The middle row in Table 5-4 shows how well the lift stations are matched to the existing PHDW inflow. It shows that many of the lift stations are oversized. Lake Street will require the third pump to assist under existing PHDW conditions, which is a deficiency.
Lift stations should also be sized to convey peak hour wet weather (PHWW) flows with all the pumps operating.
Table 5-4 provides a comparison with all the pu mps operating for all lift stations. The bottom row in Table 5 -4 shows how well the lift stations can handle PHWW flow. All of the lift stations have adequate excess capacity , except Lake Street which shows marginal excess capacity under PHWW flow conditio ns. The capacity of Lake Street Lift Station during rain events could be adversely affected by RDII due to the submerged manholes at Carr Lake.
Table 5-3 Existing Lift Station Inflow by Land Use
Lift Station Existing Flow Rates (gpd)
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre
Harkins
Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 V ista Nueva 0 563,915 0 0 2,562,149 64,040 59,173 306,498 0 97,621 19,830 25,570 21,816 1,139 43,425 142,320 0 4,330 5,048 37,051 35,858 0 4,936 195 0 24,548 14,869 91 0 1,500 12,260 75 0
0 0 2,386 0 2,781 0 0 358 652 113 0
0 3,832 0 0 58,479 1,562 0 8,762 0 2,195 0
NA NA NA NA
Las Casitas
Vista Nueva NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpd 30,506 589,757 3,525 67,973 2,780,598 65,693 63,503 322,16 6 49,963 135,862 19,830 gpm 21 410 2 47 1,931 46 44 224 35 94 14
w/ Simplex LS 1. NA NA NA NA 2,536 NA NA NA NA 299 NA
Peaking Factor 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 gpd 45,759 884,636 5,288 101,960 4,170,897 98,539 95,255 483,2 48 74,945 203,793 29,745 gpm 32 614 4 71 2,896 68 66 336 52 142 21
w/ Simplex LS 1. NA NA NA NA 3,501 NA NA NA NA 347 NA
Residential
Diurnal Factor 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Residential
Peaking Factor 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Commercial
Diurnal Factor 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Commercial
Peaking Factor 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 gpd 86,942 1,765,395 10,046 193,723 8,309,027 196,830 189,860 964,146 142,395 401,850 59,490 gpm 60 1,226 7 135 5,770 137 132 670 99 279 41
w/ Simplex LS 1. NA NA NA NA 6,375 NA NA NA NA 484 NA
Peak Hour
Wet Weather
Flow
gpm 192 2,000 19 90 6,109 107 312 975 156 775 32
Peak Hour
Dry Weather
Flow
Maximum
Day Dry
Weather Flow
Total Average
Daily Flow
Schools (gpd)
Upstream Lift Station
Residential (gpd)
Commercial (gpd)
Hotel Rooms (gpd)
Industrial (gpd)
Table Notes:
1. Flow is calculated with upstream lift station(s) operating in simplex mode. 5-14
Table 5-4 Lift Station Flow Comparison Summary
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall
De La
Torre
Harkins
Road
Lake
Street 1.2.
Las
Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista
Nueva
Operating Mode
Across the
line
contactor
VFD Altivar
660
Across the
line
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
VFD
1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start
Across the
line
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
Existing Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow by Land Use
(gpm)
60 1,226 7 135 6,375 137 132 670 99 279 41
Average Flow by Simplex
Pump
1. 640 1,600 345 370 5,550 395 510 1,420 205 555 210
Percent Difference 960% 31% 4845% 175% -13% 189% 287% 112% 1 07% 99% 408% Existing Peak Hour Wet
Weather Flow by Land Use
(gpm)
192 2,000 19 90 6,109 107 312 975 156 775 32
Average Flow by Duplex
Pumping
2. 780 2,900 395 455 7,250 560 630 1,740 260 1,050 250
Percent Difference 306% 45% 1979% 406% 19% 423% 102% 78% 67% 35% 681%
1. Flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for duplex operation since this is the only triplex lift station in the system.
2. Flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for triplex operation. 5-15
5-16
Wet Well Capacity Evaluation
To determine the adequacy of the wet well capacity under existing conditions, each lift station was evaluated under three different operating conditions, as follows:
1. Worst Case Scenario – this is when the flow coming into the lift station is exactly half of the flow rate of the pump
2. Average Daily Flows
3. Peak Hour Dry Weather Flows
Pump run times were calculated based on the lift station operating volumes and estimated pump flows. Lift station pumps should typically cycle not more than 10 times per hour to limit pump starts. Smaller horsepower pumps may be able to cycle up to 25 times per hour. This recommendation, however, should be based on actual pump manufacturer’s recommendations. It is recommended that lift stations should cycle at minimum once per day and preferably two to three times per day to minimize potential for odor. Table 5 -5 summarizes the wet well cycle time calculations without the VFD operational. As Table 5-5 notes, Carpenter Hall, Lake Street, and TP2 have VFDs that could greatly limit the amount of pump cycling on and off.
Table 5-5 shows that most of the lift stations wet well operating volumes are undersized. Increasing the operating volumes for Harkins Road, Lake Street, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Santa Rita and TP2 could improve pump performance, reduce the need for VFDs, and as shown below, increase the amount of time available for potential pumping failures.
Airport Lift Station
The Airport Lift station receives approximately 21 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 60 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this stati on always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 6 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 15 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.
Based on these pump cycling times the wet well has adequate c apacity for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydraulic constraints.
Carpenter Hall Lift Station
The Carpenter Hall Lift Station receives approximately 410 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 1,226 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs.
In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle approximately 18 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 17 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated as 1,000 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are disengaged.
De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 2 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 7 gpm under peak flow conditi ons. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately once per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 2 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydraulic constraints. However, the lift station appears to be cycling infrequently, with average residence time approximately 70 5-17
minutes, which may lead to odor issues during the hot summer months. The lift station pump appears to be substantially oversized with the pump on cycle time lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. Reducing the pump flow rate could help reduce operating costs and potential issues with extended wet well residence times. However, the force main size would also need to be decreased to ensure minimum velocities in the main.
Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 47 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 135 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 13 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 27 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.
Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is marginal for existing flows.
The wet well operating volume is estimated at 190 gallons. Depending upon the configuration of the influent piping, this could be increased since the estimated total wet well volume is 1,700 gallons.
This lift station is not required to be upgraded due to existing hydraulic constraints. The lift station pump appears to be substantially oversized for existing conditions, with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. However, Harkins Road is expected to receive future flows, discussed later in this chapter.
Lake Street Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 1,930 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 6,375 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station operates in simplex or triplex mode under average and peak flows, respectively. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs. In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle approximately 100 times per hour under average flow and peak hour dry weather flow. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated as 690 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are disengaged. This is based on estimated pump cycling times without VFDs and the estimated total wet well volume of 26,000 gallons. Also, the pumps and force mains appear to be undersized based upon the high pumping times, high sewage inflow rate, and high velocities in the force mains.
5-18
Las Casitas Lift Sta tion
This lift station receives approximately 46 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 137 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling appro ximately 14 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 30 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.
Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is marginal for existing flows.
The lift station pump appears to be oversized with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. The wet well operating volume is estimated at 180 gallons.
Depending upon the configuration of the influent piping, this could be increased because the estimated total wet well volume is 1,400 gallons.
Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 44 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 132 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 17 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 40 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.
Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volum e is inadequate for existing flows. The lift station pump appears to be oversized with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 18 seconds during average daily flow. The wet well operating volume is estimated at 140 gallons.
Depending upon the configuratio n of the influent piping, this could be increased because the estimated total wet well volume is 1,900 gallons and the pumping rate could be decreased thereby reducing pumping cycling and operating costs.
Santa Rita Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 224 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 670 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 1 0 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 19 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.
Under average flow conditions, this lift station is right at the recommended 10 cycles per hour.
The lift station pump appears to be oversized for existing conditions with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 1 minute durin g average daily flow. However, Santa Rita Lift Station is expected to receive future flows, discussed later in this chapter.
Spicer Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 35 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 100 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 7 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 12 times per hour under peak hour d ry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and no upgrades are recommended based upon hydraulic considerations.
5-19
TP2 Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 94 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 280 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs. In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle more than 11 times per hour under average flow conditions and more than 20 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow 1. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated at 420 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are set at 60 Hz maximum. This is based on estimated pump cycling times without VFDs and the estimated total wet well volume of 5,290 gallons. Also, the pumping rate could be decreased thereby reducing pumping cycling and operating costs. Reducing the pumping rate would also reduce the high velocities in the force main.
Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 14 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 41 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately once per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 2 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydrauli c constraints. However, the lift station appears to be cycling infrequently, with average residence time approximately 60 minutes, which may lead to odor issues during the hot summer months.
1 TP2 cycle times in Table 5-5 are based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by city staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps. Allowing the pumps to run without VFDs at 60 Hz would increase the simplex flow rate from 555 gpm to 740 gpm.
Table 5-5 Lift Station Cycle Times
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street 1,2 Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva Operating Mode Across the
line contactor
VFD Altivar
660
Across the
line contactor
Across the
line contactor VFD 1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start Across the line contactor
Across the
line contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the
line contactor
Wetwell Operating
Volume gallons 211 1,036 169 188 687 179 141 1,128 254 423 846 Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation 1 gpm 640 1,600 345 370 5,550 395 510 1,420 205 555 210 Estimated Duplex
Pump Operation 2 gpm 780 2,900 395 455 7,250 560 630 1,740 260 810 250 Design Simplex
Pump Operation gpm 550 2,250 200 350 5,200 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Worst Case Number of Pump Cycles per Hour (Flow In = One-half Pump Rate) minutes 1.3 2.6 2.0 2.0 0.5 1.8 1.1 3.2 5.0 3.0 16.1
Cycles per Hour 45.4 23.2 30.6 29.5 121.1 33.2 54.3 18.9 12.1 19.7 3.7 minutes 1.5 1.8 3.4 2.1 0.5 4.8 1.1 2.9 2.5 4.2 19.3
Cycles per Hour 39.0 32.6 17.7 27.9 113.5 12.6 53.2 20.3 23.6 14.2 3.1 Existing Average Daily Flow
minutes 10.3 3.4 69.6 4.6 0.5 4.4 3.5 6.0 8.8 5.4 65.7
Cycles per Hour 5.8 17.6 0.9 13.1 109.9 13.6 17.1 10.0 6.8 11.1 0.9 minutes 10.4 3.1 70.0 4.6 0.6 5.6 3.5 5.9 8.0 5.9 66.7
Cycles per Hour 5.8 19.4 0.9 13.0 106.0 10.7 17.1 10.2 7.5 10.2 0.9 Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow
minutes 3.9 3.6 24.8 2.2 0.6 2.0 1.4 3.2 5.0 3.0 25.5
Cycles per Hour 15.5 16.6 2.4 27.3 102.8 30.0 41.6 18.8 12.1 19.7 2.4 minutes 3.9 1.9 25.1 2.3 0.6 14.7 1.5 3.0 3.4 5.0 26.8
Cycles per Hour 15.2 32.3 2.4 26.4 102.8 4.1 41.3 20.0 17.6 12.0 2.2 Pump On (min) 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.9 1.5 0.9 4.3 Pump Off (min) 10.0 2.5 69.1 4.0 0.4 3.9 3.2 5.0 7.3 4.5 61.4 Pump On (min) - - - - 0.5 - - - - - -
Pump Off (min)
- - - -
0.1 - - - - - -
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Average Daily Flow
Estimated Triplex
Pump Operation
Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Table Notes:
1. Simplex flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for duplex operation.
2. Duplex flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for triplex operation. 5-20
5-21
Emergency Response Time Evaluation
Another critical factor for lift station design is the emergency response time that is available to an operator before a sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) occurs in the event of total pump failure, such as due to power outage or other anomaly. Standby generators are on site at many of the City’s lift stations, including Airport, Carpenter Hall, Lake Street, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Santa Rita, and TP2 which will reduce the risk of a SSO due to a power failure. Of those stations not provided with a standby generator, Harkins Road and Spicer, have emergency power receptacles for portable generators that are unsafe to use. Carpenter Hall has a permanent standby generator but is the only lift station without a power receptacle for a portable generator. It is recommended that all lift stations, at a minimum, have an emergency power receptacle with transfer switch to connect a portable generator in the event of a power outage. Power failures are not the only cause of emergencies, total pump failure can occur and therefore, having adequate emergency response time for operators to respond prior to a sanitary sewer overflow is critical.
Emergency response time was evaluated for each lift station, as summarized in Table 5 -6. Per discussions with City Operation’s Staff, a minimum of 30-minute response time is desired. Response time was calculated based on the amount of time between high water alarm and overflow. None of the lift stations appear to have a dedicated overflow line that gravity flows into the collection system. The overflow location is based on upstream topography and is shown in the station-specific emergency response plans (ERPs). Additional storage capacity was calculated using the volume of the upstream manholes that did not exceed the hydraulic grade line of the ERP -identified overflow location. Additional storage in upstream manholes was not calculated for Carpenter Hall , De La Torre, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, and Vista Nueva lift stations. These locations did not have sufficient as-built or survey of the upstream manholes to determine additional storage.
The response time for a lift station can be increased by increasing available storage in the wet well or providing an overflow to additional emergency storage. Alternatively, the need for immediate response can be eliminated by installing permanent stand-by generators. Results for each lift station are provided as follows:
Airport Lift Station
The Airport Lift station receives approximately 21 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 60 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 2,115 gallons. Additional storage was estimate d in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 3,220 gallons with emergency response times of 152 minutes and 53 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in La Guardia Street approximately 320 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 1,200 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch that is 50 feet away.
Carpenter Hall Lift Station
The Carpenter Hall Lift Station receives approximately 410 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 1,226 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high- level alarm and overflow is estimated at 6,334 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 15 minutes to 5 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, 5-22
respectively. The emergency response times cou ld be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole immediately adjacent to the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 800 LF in a surface ditch prior to entering a drainage ditch.
De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 2 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 7 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 846 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 346 minutes to 121 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in De La Torre Street approximately 1,000 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 300 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch approximately 30 feet away.
Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 47 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 135 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,222 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 26 minutes to 9 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 6,514 gallons with emergency response times of 138 minutes and 48 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.
Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Dayton Street approximately 1,600 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel less than 20 LF in the street prior to entering a stor m drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch approximately 5,000 feet away.
Lake Street Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 1,900 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 5,800 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 5,506 gallons. Based on these inflows and the a vailable volume, response times from high-level alarm is 3 minutes to 1 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift stati on and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 45,077 gallons with emergency response times of 23 minutes and 8 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.
The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank. 5-23
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location s during lift station failure would be a manhole in Carr Lake approximately 6,300 feet from the lift station and a manhole on N Madeira across from Chavez Park . From the Carr Lake location the SSO would travel less than 20 LF to a drainage ditch. At the other location the SSO would travel less than 100 LF to a drainage ditch.
Las Casitas Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 46 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 137 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,426 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 31 minutes to 10 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. The emergency response times could be increased further by installing an emergency overflow tank.
The ERP for thi s lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Ranchero Road located approximately 300 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 600 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that le ads to a drainage ditch located less than 20 feet away.
Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 44 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 132 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,692 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 38 minutes to 13 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Heather Circle located 300 feet away. From there the SSO would travel less than 50 LF in the street prior to enteri ng a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located approximately 600 feet away.
Santa Rita Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 224 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 670 gpm under peak flow conditions. The availabl e volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 4,136 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 15 minutes to 5 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. T he available storage including these manholes is estimated at 7,533 gallons with emergency response times of 34 minutes and 11 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.
The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in North Main Street near Massa Street approximately 760 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 60 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located approximately 600 feet away.
5-24
Spicer Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 35 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 100 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,786 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 51 minutes to 18 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is e stimated at 3,691 gallons with emergency response times of 106 minutes and 37 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.
Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Brunken Avenue approximately 850 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 600 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located 300 ft away.
TP2 Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 94 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 280 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available v olume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 6,346 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 67 minutes to 23 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station -specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 11,246 gal lons with emergency response times of 119 minutes and 40 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.
Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a remote manhole in a field approximately 750 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO could travel approximately 90 LF across the field prior to entering a drainage ditch. It is recommended to install a manhole monitor upstream of the lift station to increase awareness of potential SSOs.
Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 14 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 41 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high -level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,904 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 138 minutes to 46 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Garner Avenue approximately 750 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel less than 50 LF in the street prior to entering a drain inlet that would flow to a water body at Carr Lake located less than 100 feet away.
Table 5-6 Lift Station Emergency Response Time
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett) Carpenter Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva High Water Alarm (ft) 5 8 5.5 5 6 5.83 4 8.5 6 4.5 7
Overflow (ft) 15 30 15 18 40 21 22 20 25 35 16
Overflow Location/ MH O8-003 Wet well No GIS ID Q6-005 K5-003, J6-016 I7-019 J4 -020 D4-026 N5-014 M5-034 J7-038 Storage Volume (gal) 3,220 6,334 846 6,514 5,506 1,426 1,692 7,533 3,691 11,246 1, 904 ADF Inflow without
Upstream LS (gpm) 21 410 2 47 1,931 46 44 224 35 94 14
ADF Response Time
(min) 152 15 346 138 3 31 38 34 106 119 138
ADF Inflow with
Upstream LS (gpm) NA NA NA NA 2,326 NA NA NA NA NA NA
ADF Response Time
(min) NA NA NA NA 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA
PHDWF Inflow without
Upstream LS (gpm) 60 1,226 7 135 5,770 137 132 670 99 279 41 PHDWF Response Time
(min) 53 5 121 48 1 10 13 11 37 40 46
PHDWF Inflow with
Upstream LS (gpm) NA NA NA NA 6,165 NA NA NA NA NA NA
PHDWF Response Time
(min) NA NA NA NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA= Not Applicable
5-25
5-26
H Y D R A U L I C P E R F O R M A N C E E V A L U A T I O N - F U T U R E C O N D I T I O N S
It is critical to understand what upgrades are required to meet estimated fut ure flows in addition to correcting existing deficiencies. The following sections analyze each lift station for future wastewater flows under the same criteria as existing wastewater flows.
Future Wastewater Flows and Recommendations
Future flow for each lift station was calculated based on planned developments and future development in accordance with the City’s General Plan land use, as described in detail in Chapters 2 and 4. Due to variability in wastewater generation from different industrial and comm ercial users, it is difficult to accurately predict future flow conditions for this type of development. As development occurs, flow contributions will need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis and additional modeling may be required. Note, the future flow estimates are based on the wastewater flowing to each lift station by gravity. If the proposed future development includes any lift stations, this will increase the point flow to the downstream collection system and existing lift stations that may impact the recommendations noted in this chapter and the collection system chapter.
The following summarizes anticipated future flow contribution to each lift station and are shown in Table 5-7.
Future lift station tributary area boundaries are depicted on Figure 5-2.
Airport (Moffett) Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial area south of the airport. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial development in the Southeast FGA is estimated to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows. This is contrary to the findings reported in the previous master plan. Based on ground level topography in the future expansion area for commercial development near De La Torre Lift Station, it is anticipated that only minimal future flows would be routed to this lift station. As commercial development is proposed in this region, this will need to be verified.
Carpenter Hall Lift Stati on
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, and schools in the area. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Areas K and V are estimated to increase by 5 perce nt. Since the future PHDW flow of 1,286 gpm is less than the simplex pumping capacity of 1,600 gpm, the existing lift station has sufficient excess capacity to manage future flows.
De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the co mmercial and hotels in the area west of the airport. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial development in a portion of Southeast FGA is estimated to be more than 6,000 percent increase.
The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are estimated to be 2 gpm and 7 gpm, respectively.
Assuming future flows from expansion of commercial development in the Southeast FGA is routed to this lift station, flows are estimated to increase average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow to 165 gpm and 469 gpm, respectively. The lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 350 gpm.
5-27
Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial areas in the area . Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from the Salinas Ag -Industrial Center is estimated to be more than 118 percent increase.
The existing average daily flow and peak h our dry weather flow are estimated to be 47 gpm and 135 gpm, respectively. Based on the Salinas Ag -Industrial Center sewer connections per the Ruggeri -Jensen-Azar and Associates Sanitary Sewer System Analysis Report, future flows to Harkins Road Lift Station are estimated to increase average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow to 1 03 gpm and 563 gpm, respectively. This report did identify that a localized sanitary sewer pump station will be needed to connect sewer flows from the development to the City’s existing system at Dayton Street. The report did not size this pump station, so an assumed 270 gpm point flow was included in the model based on the peaking factors identified in this SSMPU.
This assumption will need to be verified once the sizing of this localized lift station is complete.
Based on the above assumptions, Harkins Road lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 370 gpm.
Lake Stree t Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from a large upstream area. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Area V are estimated to increase by 96 percent. Since this lift station is undersized for existing conditions, it should be upgraded as soon as possible.
This lift station is undersized for existing conditions and should be upgraded prior to any future developme nt in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Areas K and V. The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 1,931 gpm and 6,375 gpm, respectively. The future average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 3,777 gpm and 11,847 gpm, respectively. The maximum duplex and triplex pumping rates are 5,550 gpm and 7,250 gpm, respectively. Since the duplex pumping rate is less than PHDW for both existing and future conditions, this lift station should be upgraded to meet both existing and future needs.
Las Casitas Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential properties in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is expected to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.
Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential and commercial in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is expected to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.
Santa Rita Li ft Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area.
Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in Target Growth Areas K and the septic conversion from Bolsa Knolls are estimated to increase by 81 percent. Since the future PHDW flow of 1,198 gpm 5-28
is less than the simplex pumping capacity of 1,575 gpm, the existing lift station has sufficient excess capacity to manage future flows.
Spicer Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, and hotels in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial and industrial development i s minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.
5-29
TP2 Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area.
Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in the upstream Focused Growth Area and East FGA are estimated to increase by approximately 110 percent. The lift station would need to be upgraded to accommodate the expected increase in future flows.
The existing av erage daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 94 gpm and 484 gpm, respectively. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in the upstream Focused Growth Area and East FGA are estimated to increase the ADF and PHDW flows from 94 gpm to 198 gpm and from 279 gpm to 580 gpm, respectively. The estimated future flows are based upon implementing the proposed CIP upgrade at SSMH M6- 012 at East Alisal and South Sanborn that addresses an existing deficiency and reroutes flow away from TP2 to South Sanborn. Therefore, only 12 percent of the flow from potential future development in East FGA would contribute to TP2. The lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 550 gpm.
Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed.
Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.
Table 5-7 Summary of Future Lift Station Wastewater Flows Lift Station Future Flow Rates (gpd)
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill L ake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 1. Vista Nueva 0 563,915 0 0 4,583,023 64,040 59,173 392,939 0 152,462 19,83 0 25,570 52,207 234,779 43,425 779,671 0 4,330 180,872 37,051 130,195 0 4,936 195 0 104,694 14,869 91 0 1,500 12,260 75 0
0 0 2,386 0 2,781 0 0 358 652 113 0
0 3,832 0 0 58,479 1,562 0 8,762 0 2,195 0
NA NA NA NA
Las Casitas
Vista Nueva NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpd 30,506 620,148 237,165 148,119 5,438,824 65,693 63,503 584 ,431 49,963 285,040 19,830 Percent Increase 2. 0% 5% 6628% 118% 96% 0% 0% 81% 0% 110% 0% gpm 21 431 165 103 3,777 46 44 406 35 198 14
w/ Simplex LS 1 NA NA NA NA 4,382 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Peaking Factor 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 gpd 45,759 930,222 355,748 222,179 8,158,235 98,539 95,255 876 ,647 74,945 427,559 29,745 gpm 32 646 247 154 5,665 68 66 609 52 297 21
w/ Simplex LS 1 NA NA NA NA 5,820 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Residential Diurnal
Factor 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Residential
Peaking Factor 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Commercial
Diurnal Factor 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Commercial
Peaking Factor 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 gpd 86,942 1,852,010 675,920 422,139 16,188,101 196,830 189,8 60 1,724,569 142,395 835,232 59,490 gpm 60 1,286 469 563 11,242 137 132 1,198 99 580 41
w/ Simplex LS 2. NA NA NA NA 11,847 NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpm 192 2,045 313 398 9,498 107 312 1,430 156 913 32
Percent Increase
3. 0% 2% 1547% 342% 55% 0% 0% 47% 0% 18% 0%
Total Average
Daily Flow
Maximum Day
Dry Weather
Flow
Hotel Rooms
Residential (gpd)
Commercial (gpd)
Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow
Schools
Industrial (gpd)
Upstream Lift Station
Peak Hour Wet
Weather Flow
Table Notes:
1. For TP2, only 12% of the future flows from East FGA is contributing to TP2 with a proposed weir constructed at SSMH M6-012 at East Alisal and South Sanborn (see CIP for existing deficiencies).
2. Flow is calculated with upstream lift station(s) operating in simplex mode.
3. Percent increase in future flow rate versus existing flow rate. 5-29
5-31
S I T E I N V E S T I G A T I O N S U M M A R Y & O V E R A L L R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S
Based on the hydraulic analysis and discussion provided, the following is a summary of recommendations for the City’s eleven lift stations. The following table provides an overview of the recommendations for upgrades based upon the visual inspection of the lift stations. All of the lift stations should b e upgraded such that a spare pump (motor and pump) is available for each lift station. Many of the lift stations, except Airport, Lake Street, and Vista Nueva, should be upgraded with emergency bypass piping systems and receptacles and/or transfer switches for a portable generator. The discussion below gives detailed recommendations for each lift station.
T A B L E 5 - 8 . S U M M A R Y O F L I F T S T A T I O N U P G R A D E S B A S E D U P O N
V I S U A L I N S P E C T I O N
Recommended Lift Station
Capital Improvements
Location
Repair/Replace Pump/Motor
Replace Control Panel/MCC
Repair Control Panel Disconnects
Install/Upgrade Generator Receptacle & Transfer
Switch
Move Control Panel to Above Grade
Evaluate Generator Upgrade
Upgrade Level Controller/SCADA
Coat Wet Well / Dry Well
Install Emergency Bypass
Install Emergency Overflow
Provide Washdown Water
Address Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Airport X X X X X X
Carpenter X X X X X X X X
De La Torre X X X X X X X X X
Harkins Rd X X X X X X X X
Lake Street X X X X X X X X
Las Casitas X X X X X X X X
Mill Lake X X X X X X
Santa Rita X X X X X X X X
Spicer X X X X X X X
TP2 X X X X X X X X
Vista Nueva X X X X X X
5-32
Airport (Moffett)
Airport is a duplex lift station with 10 hp submersible Flygt pumps with an estimated simplex flow rate of 640 gpm which is more than the rated and measured flow of approximately 550 gpm and 470 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revealed that the motors need to be rebuilt which could restore pump performance to its rated capacity. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch, a receptacle for a portable generator, and bypass capabilities.
Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated at only 60 gpm. Therefore, the pumps could be downsized instead of rebuilt. However, to maintain self-cleaning velocities in the forcemain, the wastewater flows must be at least 320 gpm. It is recommended to evaluate the condition of force main and determine if the main could be downsized by lining or other means. This would only be recommended if the forcemain needs to be replaced. Otherwise, it would be cost prohibitive.
The overall condition of this lift station is mixed. That is, some of the equipment is working, but the site inspection was unable to determine if it is working as engineered. The two pump motors are rated as good and poor, respectively. The wet well is rated as operational. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install overloads on load side of contactors for motor protection b. Replace breaker disconnect handles for pumps 1 and 2 and install proper disconnect hardware
c. Proper labeling for the line voltage on the cabinet and the back-up manual transfer switch lever positions
d. Provide wiring diagram at station
e. Replace Sch 40 pipe with proper electrical conduit
f. Install XP fittings/seals on conduits
g. Upgrade to standardized SCADA
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Replace pumps and motors
b. Move check valves into a vault located outside of the wet well 3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Replace wet well coating
c. Relocate wet well vent
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
e. Determine extent of corrosion on discharge piping and rehabilitate as needed 4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace LCD screen for the automatic transfer switch b. Paint the generator enclosure
c. Replace the handle to wet well
5-33
Carpenter Hall
Carpenter Hall is a duplex lift station with 30 hp dry -pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but no receptacle for a portable generator or bypass capabilities. The generator should be evaluated for replacement since the generator has required extensive repairs. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 3,000 gpm which is more than the measured flow of about 1,600 gpm due to the pumps operating on VFDs.
Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated at less than 1,300 gpm. The existing pumps are oversized to meet existing and future flows. In addition, the pumps are not operating at their best efficiency point at the reduced flow rate. It is recommended that the City replace the pumps, when needed , with pumps that better fit the needs of the existing and future demands. Note, the force main velocities should be considered if the pump flows are reduced to ensure 2 fps cleaning velocity is maintained.
The overall condition of this lift station is operational because the equipment is working, but unable to determine if it is working as engineered. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Label electrical cabinets with line voltage
b. Repair or replace motor to pump #1
c. Install disconnect switches for each pump at the bottom of the dry pit. d. Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator 2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Replace flow meter
b. Install emergency bypass system
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Repair or replace wet well access lid
c. Repair piping/penetration from dry well to wet well
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Grease seal for Pump #1
b. Grease mechanical seal for Pump #2
5-34
De La Torre
De La Torre is a duplex lift station with 5 hp dry -pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities but does have a receptacle for portable generator. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 345 gpm which is more than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 342 gpm and 354 gpm, respectively. The pumps are over -sized to manage the existing flows and undersized for the anticipated future flows of 469 gpm. Therefore, the pumps and possibly the force main would need to be upsized sometime in the future to accommodate development. It is recommended that this be re-evaluated when the future development is in the planning stages.
The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are currently in poor condition. This lift station is undersized to meet future development needs and will require an upgrade. It is unknown if the existing dry well is capable of housing upsized pumps and electrical. It is recommended that a study be completed to determine if the lift station should be completely replaced or can simply be upgraded.
In addition to this study, the proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install a receptacle and transfer switch for portable electrical generator b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors d. Install new control panel above ground
e. Upgrade Level Controller system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install fencing around lift station
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Install emergency bypass system
e. Coat wet well and recoat the dry well floor
4) Additional Studies
a. Perform study to determine if lift station is required to be replaced or is capable of being upsized to meet future demands
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace the isolation valves and check valves
b. Remove the debris in discharge pipe wye
5-35
Harkins Road
Harkins is a duplex lift station with 5 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities. The receptacle for a portable generator is unsafe and should be upgraded as soon as possible. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 370 gpm which is comparable to the pumps’ rated performance and greater than the measured flows of 228 gpm and 281 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revealed that they are in poor condition and the check valves may be faulty. Repairing the pumps and check valves could restore pump performance to their rated capacities.
The pumps are over -sized to manage the existing flows and undersized for the anticipated future flows of 563 gpm. Therefore, the pumps and possibly the force m ain would need to be upsized sometime in the future to accommodate development. It is recommended that this be re-evaluated when the future development is in the planning stages. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors d. Label control panel with line voltage
e. Install new control panel above ground
f. Upgrade Level Controller system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install fencing around lift station
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Install improved emergency bypass system
e. Repair leak in the 6" force main downstream of the wye 4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace or repairing the isolation valves and check valves
5-36
Lake Street
Lake Street is a triplex lift station with 30 hp dry -pit Smith & Loveless pumps connected to two separate force mains – one pump routes flows to a 12 -inch diameter main and the other two pumps route flow to a 14 -inch diameter main. This lift station has a dedicated ba ckup generator and receptacle for portable generator. The generator should be evaluated for replacement since the generator has required extensive repairs. Bypass capabilities were recently added with the Lake Street Emergency Sewer Replacement Project. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 2,600 gpm which approximates the pumps’ design rating and measured flow of about 2,600 gpm. The pumps’ estimated duplex flow rate is 5,500 gpm. Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated to be 5,770 gpm and 11,242 gpm, respectively.
This lift station has significant deficiencies including insufficient wet well storage, undersized pumps, aged force mains, ongoing clogging/ragging issues, and outdated controls and electrical system. This lift station also poses a safety/falling hazard to operators working at this lift station. It is recommended to completely replace this lift station and force mains in lieu of rehabilitation. This is an immediate need, thus, the deficiencies noted be low should only be completed to keep the lift station operational until a new lift station is constructed.
The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Provide arc flash protection at pump contactors
b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Upgrade Level Controller system
d. Replace galvanized conduit with PVC conduit
e. Label control panel with line voltage
f. Install supports for conduits
g. Replace MCC cabinet.
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Upsize pumps
b. Relocate ventilation intake
c. Install a higher flow sump pump
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Replace floor and sink drain pipes
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Provide restroom with hot water
e. Install alarm system and video surveillance
4) Additional Studies
a. Preliminary Design Report for upgraded lift station. Potentially relocate lift station across the street on the east side of West Rossi Street. b. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Install a guard for the drive belt on ventilation system
5-37
Las Casitas
Las Casitas is a duplex lift station with 10 hp dry -pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabili ties or a receptacle for portable generator. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 395 gpm which is more than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 357 gpm and 345 gpm, respectively. The pumps are over-sized compared to the existing flows and the anticipated future PHDW flow of 137 gpm, however, due the forcemain size, the pumps cannot be downsized without also reducing the forcemain diameter which would be cost prohibitive.
The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are currently in good to operational condition. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install a new control panel above ground
b. Repair or replace the breaker disconnects
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install emergency bypass system
c. Coat bottom of dry well and entire wet well
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair or replace Pump #2. Perform investigation to determine source of high pitch noise. Pull Pump 2 and install spare pump to see if this reveals the source. b. Replace the LCD screen to automatic transfer switch
c. Spot repairs to generator enclosure
d. Remove debris from wye
e. Clean out and installing a blind flange at bottom of wye to facilitate cleaning f. Perform an investigation upstream of this location to determine source of grease build-up (aka Fats, Oil, and Grease, or FOG investigation)
5-38
Mill Lake
Mill Lake is a duplex lift station with 15 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 510 gpm which approximates the pu mps’ rated performance and the measured flows of 500 gpm. The pumps are over -sized compared to the existing flows and the anticipated future PHDW flow of 132 gpm. It is recommended that when the pumps are to be replaced, the pumps be replaced with smaller pumps but still maintain cleaning velocities.
This will reduce the City’s operational costs over time.
The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are less than satisfactory condition. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Move control cabinet above ground
b. Replace control panel breaker disconnects
c. Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
d. Move electrical conduit underground
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install fencing around dry well
c. Coat wet well
d. Install emergency bypass system
e. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair the broken conduit leading into dry well
b. Rebalance or replace pump impellers to remove vibrations c. Perform spot repairs for rust on generator enclosure d. Perform a FOG investigation upstream of this location to determine source of grease build-up
5-39
Santa Rita
Santa Rita is a duplex lift station with 30 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 1,420 gpm which approximates the pumps’ rated performance and the measured flows of approximately 1,500 gpm. The pumps are oversized compared to the existing PHDW flow and the anticipated future PHDW flow of 1,200 gpm but are within reason to maintain as currently installed.
The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are less than satisfactory condition. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install control cabinet above grade
b. Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons c. Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
d. Repair broken conduit between dry and wet well
e. Seal all penetrations into the dry well
f. Upgrade Micro-Mac control system
g. Move conduit underground
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Install emergency overflow tank
c. Repair wet well coating
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair rust on generator enclosure
5-40
Spicer
Spicer is a duplex lift station with 7.5 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities. The receptacle for the portable generator is unsafe and should be upgraded as soon as possible. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 205 gpm which is less than the pumps’ rated performance and comparable to the measured flows of 195 gpm and 218 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revea led that they are in poor condition. Repairing the pump impellers could improve the pump performance2. Prior to implementing the following recommended upgrades, a study should be performed to determine if the wet well could be relocated outside of the str eet. If not, a study should be conducted to determine if an emergency overflow tank is required or if the gravity system has enough capacity to add sufficient response time in case of lift station failure. The proposed CIP program includes the following up grades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install cabinet above grade
b. Installing a transfer switch for emergency back-up generator c. Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons d. Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
e. Replace conduit in wet well
f. Upgrade the SCADA control system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Repair leak in the 6" force main in the dry well
a. Install removeable bollards at the dry well
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Coat the wet well
c. Repair coating on the floor of the dry well
b. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Perform study to determine if the wet well can be relocated outside of the street.
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. N/A
2 The pump impellers were replaced on May 18, 2022 with non -clog impellers. The pumps performance should be evaluated to confirm that the new impellers are operating adequately. 5-41
TP2
TP2 is a duplex lift station with 10 hp dry -pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 555 gpm with the pumps operating at 48 Hz. This is g reater than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 565 gpm and 491 gpm. This pumping rate is based upon the VFDs set at 48 Hz maximum to mitigate vibrations in the pumps that may be due to the use of no clog impellers. The sour ce of the vibrations could be investigated by rebalancing or replacing the impellers. If the VFDs were set to allow the pumps to operate at 60 Hz maximum, the pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate would increase to 740 gpm, which would be sufficient to meet future PHDW flow of 580 gpm and the lift station would not need to be upsized.
The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are rated less than satisfactory condition. The configuration of the lift station also poses a safety/falling risk to operators. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Replace splice box in wet well
b. Install a main breaker with disconnect and disconnects for both pumps on the outside of the cabinet
c. Label the cabinet with the voltage
d. Install GFI protection for air compressor
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Investigate vibration issue at 60 Hz. If vibrations persist, lift station upgrades will be required to meet future flows.
b. Install on-site flow meter
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Install emergency overflow tank
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. The condition of the generator should be evaluated for possible repair or replacement
b. Investigate how to mitigate safety risks to operators 5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. N/A
5-42
Vista Nueva
Vista Nueva is a duplex lift station with 7.5 hp submersible Flygt pumps 3. This lift station has a receptacle for a portable generator and bypass capabilities but does not have a dedicated backup generator. The estimated simplex flow rate is 210 gpm which approximates the measured flow of 200 gpm for the pump that is in good condition. Inspection of the pumps revealed that one of the motors needs to be rebuilt which could restore pump performance to its rated capacity. The pumps appear to be over -sized for the future flows, but no upgrades are recommended.
The overall condition of this lift station is mixed with one of the pumps and wet well rated as good and operational, respectively, and the other pump rated poor. The configuration of the lift station also poses a risk to the safety of operators. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Seal the conduits leading to the electrical cabinet
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Replace vault cover
b. Coat wet well
c. Install emergency overflow tank
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Conduct a study to determine source of moisture into the electrical cabinet b. Investigate ways to mitigate safety risks to operators 5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair or replace level indicator lights on control panel b. Replace Pump #2 volute
3 Pump curve data and force main size and location are provided by Doyle McFarland in emails d ated May 5, 2022. 3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Legend
3Ú City Lift Stations
3Ú Salinas Area Pump Station
Modeled Sewer Pipes
Lift Station Tributary
Airport
Carpenter Hall
De La Torre
Harkins
Lake Street
Las Casitas
Mill Lake
Santa Rita
Spicer
TP2
Vista Nueva
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 5-1
LIFT STATION
EXISTING TRIBUTARY AREAS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
Target Area K
Southeast FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
East Area
Specific Plan
West Area
Specific Plan
Central Area
Specific Plan
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
Ag-Industrial
Center
Legend
3Ú City Lift Stations
3Ú Salinas Area Pump Station
Modeled Sewer Pipes
Target Growth Areas
Future Growth Areas
Lift Station Tributary
Airport
Carpenter Hall
De La Torre
Harkins
Lake Street
Las Casitas
Mill Lake
Santa Rita
Spicer
TP2
Vista Nueva
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 5-2
LIFT STATION
FUTURE TRIBUTARY AREAS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
6-1
C H AP T E R 6
CO L L EC T I O N SYST E M AN ALYS IS
This Chapter presents the analysis of the domestic wastewater collection system for the City. Refer to Chapter 5 for a detailed evaluation of the City’s eleven (11) lift stations and corresponding force mains. All figures are provided at the end of this chapter.
I N T R O D U C T I O N
As discussed in Chapter 3, the City’s collection system is comprised of approximately 292 miles of gravity pipes, which vary in diameter from 6 -inch to 54 -inch, eleven (11) City -owned lift stations, and two (2) miles of force mains. The main trunk sewer sy stem (typically 10 -inch and larger, with some exceptions) was analyzed using Innovyze InfoSWMM Version 14.7 sewer modeling program to evaluate performance of the wastewater collection system under both existing and future flow conditions. Figure 6 -1 provides an overview of the existing gravity wastewater collection system, lift stations, and force mains that were included in the hydraulic model.
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M A N A L Y S I S C R I T E R I A
The City’s Public Works Department’s Standard Specifications and Design Standards, updated March 2017, and the December 2019 City Sewer System Management Plan, were used as the basis to update the City’s hydraulic criteria shown in Table 6 -1. These standards were applied in the analysis of the trunk sewer collection system model to identify deficiencies and recommended improvements.
One of the performance criteria for gravity sewer lines is the maximum allowable flow depth, often expressed as the d/D ratio. The variables used in this ratio include the depth of flow in a pipe, d, divided by the diameter of the pipe, D. The maximum d/D criteria defined in the Sewer System Management Plan is 0.90 for all existing pipes and
0.75 for new developments. Based on discussion and review with the City, the maximum allowable flow depth criteria is based on pipe diameter ranges, consistent with industry standards that typically have varying levels of d/D ratios for various pipe sizes. Refer to Table 6-1 for the allowable d/D for all pipe sizes.
Another performance criteria to note are the forcemain hydraulics. The City standards currently state a minimum velocity of 3.5 ft/s and maximum velocity of 6.0 ft/s. As discussed in Ch. 5, forcemain velocities should be greater than 2.0 ft/s to maintain self -cleansing properties but less than 5 .0 ft/s to minimize head loss and potential for water hammer. These update criteria are shown in Table 6-1.
6-2
T A B L E 6 - 1 . H Y D R A U L I C C R I T E R I A F O R E X I S T I N G S Y S T E M S
S T A N D A R D C R I T E R I A
V E L O C I T Y
Minimum: 2.0 ft/s for peak flows; 1.75 ft/s at average
rate of flow
Maximum: 8.0 ft/sec
M I N I M U M S L O P E
6-inch: 1.0%
8-inch: 0.40%
10-inch: 0.26%
12-inch & above: 0.20%
F R I C T I O N F A C T O R
Manning’s n (gravity)=0.013 for Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP)
0.011 for Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Hazen-Williams C (pressure)=100 to 120 depending on
pipe size, material, and age
M I N I M U M P I P E S I Z E 8-inch
M A X I M U M
A L L O W A B L E F L O W
D E P T H
10-inch or less: d/D=0.67
12-inch to 24-inch: d/D=0.80
27-inch or greater: d/D=0.90
S U R C H A R G I N G
Allowed as long as the Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL)
remains at least 5-Feet Below the rim elevation
F O R C E M A I N
H Y D R A U L I C S
Minimum: 2.0 ft/s
Maximum: 5.0 ft/s
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L D E V E L O P M E N T
A hydraulic model of the sewer collection system was developed by Wallace Group with the Innovyze InfoSWMM Version 14.7 sewer modeling program. InfoSWMM utilizes Manning’s Equation for open channel flow (gravity pipes), Dynamic Wave analysis for flow rout ing through the collection system, and the Hazen-Williams Equation for pressurized flow conditions (force mains). Model results were evaluated for pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio under various flow conditions.
Flow Allocation
Existing and future flows were analyzed in the sewer model for dry and wet weather conditions. As discussed in Chapter 4, peaking factors were obtained during flow monitoring and flow rates were derived on a per-parcel basis by land use. These wastewater flows were allocated to individual sewer manholes based on the closest manhole to the land use parcel. Each tributary area represents the total residential, hotel, commercial, and institutional customers contained within the tributary boundary.
Future flows we re allocated to the model based on most probable connection location of the Future Growth Areas, Focused Growth Areas, and Target areas. Refer to Figure 6-2 for the future flow allocations.
Any deficiencies identified in this SSMPU are based on these as sumed connections and the wastewater flows (by gravity, not pumped) discussed in Ch. 4. Additional modeling should be performed during the planning and design phases for each of these future developments should wastewater flows, tie -in 6-3
locations to the City’s collection system, or timing of future developments be different than what is shown on Figure 6-2.
Model Calibration
Approximately six weeks of sewer flow data was collected in support of the hydraulic model development, as described in Chapter 4 of this report. Representative data for each flow monitoring location was compared to the model results. Through this process, both the land use flow factors and the diurnal curves were adjusted to represent the system flows as recorded through the flow monitoring.
The City provided pump curves for each of the eleven lift stations. The lift stations were calibrated based on FRM’s measured flows during their lift station evaluation. If FRM noted worn impellers, poor pumping conditions, etc., the pump curve was adjusted to represent FRM’s measured pumping rate.
System Conditions Analyzed
The hydraulic model was utilized to analyze dry and wet weather system flows for both existing and future flow conditions. Within the model, multiple scenarios were developed that represent these various conditions. Existing and future scenarios were utilized to identify system upgrades required in order to meet performance criteria and to identify areas recommended for high priority maintenance operations.
Scenarios developed consist of the following:
❖ Existing ADF Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, average dry weather flow conditions.
❖ Future ADF Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, average dry weather flow conditions with all future development connecting to the existing collection system.
❖ Existing MDDW Flow Scenario: Th is scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, maximum dry weather flow conditions. This scenario includes peak hour dry weather flow (PHDWF).
❖ Existing MDDW Flow + Reclamation Ditch Diversion: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, maximum dry weather flow conditions plus 6 cfs diversion coming from the reclamation ditch, since this diversion happens during the dry weather season only.
❖ Future MDDW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, maximum dry weather flow conditions, with all future development connecting to the existing collection system. This scenario includes PHDWF.
❖ Future MDDW Flow + Reclamation Ditch Diversion: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, maximum dry weather flow conditions plus the 6 cfs diversion coming from the reclamation ditch, since this diversion happens during the dry weather season.
❖ Existing PHWW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, peak hour wet weather flow conditions.
❖ Future PHWW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, peak hour wet weather flow conditions, with all future development connecting to the existing collection system.
6-4
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L R E S U L T S – E X I S T I N G F L O W
C O N D I T I O N S
Deficient System Capacity
The following locations were identified through the analysis as having insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying existing population wastewater flows. Figure 6-3 shows a system-wide map of available capacity under existing worst case peak conditions. Pipes with available capacity are shown in green, marginal capacity (within 10% of exceeding the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity) are shown in yellow, and above the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity are shown in red. Refer to Figure 6-4 for an overall map of the recommended areas for pipe upgrades.
Where improvements are recommended to the collection system, worst case d/D values are provided for reference. These d/D values represent a snapshot of the system under either: a) existing conditions, or b) proposed conditions with all improvements in place. In many cases, recommended upgrades would increase downstream maximum d/D, exceeding the City’s standards, if the downstream recommended improvements were not constructed. Through the digital sewer model, maximum d/D was analyzed for the system, ensuring that recommended upgrades did not trigger additional downstream improvements.
Cesar Chavez
This segment receives a large amount of flow from the Alisal community, a dense part of the City. A majority of the flow comes from residential lots, but there are also several commercial lots along N Sanborn Road, and several schools.
The Cesar Chavez Park Existing CIP project proposes to upsize approximately 2,100 feet of 15-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) to 18 -inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe from MH -J7- 007 near Garner Ave to MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr. These pipe segments have d/D values ranging from 0.66 to 0.95 full during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing would decrease the d/D to a range of 0.38 to 0.58.
This project also proposes upsizing approximately 3,000 ft of 21-inch VCP to 24-inch PVC pipe from MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr to MH-L6-001 near Circle Dr. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.39 to 1 during existing peak conditions. Four (4) manholes are also surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in this section. Upsizing would decrease d/D values to a range of 0.29 to 0.66.
An additional 3,500 ft of 24 -inch VCP should be upgraded to 27 -inch PVC from manhole L6-001 near Circle Dr to manhole K5-007 near Longbow Way. These pipe segments have d/D values from 0.60 to 0.85 during existing peak flow condition s. Upsizing this pipe will reduce d/D values to within 0.48 and 0.61.
In addition to the pipe replacements, it is also proposed to construct approximately 70 ft of new 24 -inch pipe from MH -K5-007 to MH -K5-014, to split flow between 24 -inch and 30-inch parallel mains.
City maintenance crews have noted that CCTV evaluation r ecorded pipe encrustations and manholes condition repairs for the pipe segment between K5-001 and K5-003. 6-5
Cherokee Dr
This segment of pipe is an important collector for the northern portion of Salinas. It receives a large amount of residential flow from the Santa Rita neighborhoods as well as commercial flows from the Northridge Mall and Santa Rita Plaza.
The Cherokee Dr. Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 1,600 feet of 18- inch VCP with 24 -inch PVC pipe on Cherokee Dr from Seminole Way (MH-G3-008) to Tulane St (MH-H3-009). Cherokee Dr has insufficient capacity for existing conditions, with pipes segment d/D values between 0.67 and 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Four (4) of the twelve (12) manholes in this section are also sur charging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition. Upsizing these segments will reduce d/D values to between 0.34 and 0.48.
Upstream TP2
The Upstream TP2 Diversion Existing CIP project proposes to divert flows along East Alisal to South Sanborn Road by increasing the invert at MH-M6-012 by 0.35 ft. This can be done by constructing a weir within the existing manhole. The weir will cause the 18-inch along East Alisal to act as an overflow line, lessening the flow just downstream of TP2 , which currently has a d/D value of 0.91 to 1.0 under existing peak conditions and two (2) surcharging manholes within 5 ft of the manhole rim.
It should be noted that future flows will affect this CIP, causing a need for upsizing the pipes along South Sanborn Rd.
Noice Dr/ Tyler St
The Noice Dr./Tyler Street existing CIP consists of two sections of pipe: one on Noice Drive and one on Tyler Street. These two sections are connected on West Laurel Drive and consist of VCP with diameters of 12-inches or less.
Noice Drive receives mostly residential flow, but also some commercial flow from N Main St, as well as flow from the North Salinas High School. For this section the Noice Dr/ Tyler St Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,100 feet of 8-inch VCP to 12- inch PVC pipe from MH -G4-015 at Chaparral St to MH -H4-011 at E Laurel Dr. This pipe segment has a d/D of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Seven (7) of the nine (9) manholes on this segment are also surcharging to within 5 ft o f the manhole rim during peak conditions. Upsizing would bring d/D values at peak condition down to 0.43 to 0.53.
Based on survey of this area, the downstream invert at MH -H4-012 is higher than the upstream invert at MH-H4-011. As part of this CIP, it is recommended to reconstruct MH- H4-012 to match inverts and change the flow direction from MH-H4-011 to MH-H4-012.
Additionally, it is recommended that approximately 170 ft of new 12 -inch PVC pipe be constructed to connect MH-H4-006 to MH-H4-001 at West Laurel Drive and North Main Street. This new pipe will relieve the parallel 8-inch lines along North Main St that exceeds capacity under existing peak flow conditions.
6-6
Tyler Street also receives mostly residential flows with some commercial flow, and flow from one school, Kamman Elementary. It is recommended that approximately 3,300 feet of 12-inch VCP along West Laurel Dr. and Tyler St. from MH-H3-023 to MH-I3-001 should be upsized to 15-inch PVC. The d/D value for this section is 1.0 and nine (9) of the eleven (11) manholes are surcharging to within 5 ft of the manhole rims in the existing PHWWF condition. Upsizing would bring d/D values down to 0.43 to 0.70.
Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation
Natividad Road is a principal arterial in Salinas and this segment of pipe collects flow mostly from residential lots, with portions coming from commercial, and a few schools.
The Natividad Rd CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,700 feet of 12-inch VCP to 15-inch PVC pipe from MH -G6-002 to MH -H6-003. These pipe segments have a d/D value of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing would reduce d/D values to a range of 0.31 to 0.68. This project also recommends an overflow weir be constructed 0.5 ft above MH-H6-003 invert to make the 12-inch parallel an overflow pipe. Approximately 3,600 ft of 15-inch VCP should be replaced with 18-inch PVC pipe from MH-H6-003 to MH- I5-007. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.85 to 1.0 during exist ing peak flow conditions.
At Sherwood Dr, approximately 305 ft of 12 -inch VCP from MH -J5-003 to MH -J5-005 should be upsized to 15 -inch PVC pipe. An additional 2,000 ft of 15 -inch VCP should be upsized to 18-inch PVC from MH-J5-005 to MH-J4-010. These segments of pipe have d/D values of 0.99 to 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Eighteen (18) of the manholes are also surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
Upsizing would bring down the d/D values to between 0.39 and 0.54.
As an alternative project, the Natividad Consolidation CIP proposes to abandon the parallel 12-inch overflow and upsize the approximately 7,400 ft of 15-inch pipe to 21-inch from MH -H6-003 to MH -I5-011 and 24 -inch from MH -I5-011 to MH -J4-022, as well as upsize approximately 1,100 feet of 21 -inch line to 30-in line from MH -J4-022 to MH-K4- 002. Note, the last segment of this CIP proposes to upsize the 21 -inch line under HWY 101.
Northridge Mall
This segment of pipe runs on North Main Street from East Boronda Road to just past San Juan Grade Road. This pipe receives mostly residential flows, in addition to commercial flows from Northridge Mall and Santa Rita Plaza, as well as flows from three schools.
The Northridge Mall Existing CIP project proposes the upsizing of approximately 2,300 ft of 15-inch VCP to 18-inch PVC pipe from MH-E4-007 to MH-F4-011 along N Main St. These pipe segments have a d/D of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing will reduce the d/D to a range of 0.31 to 0.80.
It is also recommended to connect the 18 -inch pipe to the 27 -inch pipe at MH -F4-031, abandoning 1,800 feet of the parallel 12 -inch line along North Main Street from MH -F4- 6-7
031 to MH-G4-005. With current conditions, six (6) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
Low Pipe Velocity
Low pipe velocity results in the increased likelihood for solids to settle out of wastewater flow, leading to pipe backups and blockages. The City’s design standards specify a minimu m pipe velocity of 2.0 ft/s at peak conditions in order to “flush” out the line and maintain solids in suspension. A total of 325 modeled pipes were identified with a velocity below 2.0 ft/s under existing max day conditions. It is recommended that pipes i dentified with a maximum velocity of less than 2.0 ft/s be flushed on a regular basis that corresponds with the City’s maintenance schedule. Total length of pipe running with a max day velocity less than 2.0 ft/s is 23 miles. Figure 6 -5 depicts the pipes identified with low pipe velocities. Note, these recommendations are only for sewer mains modeled. It is anticipated that there are more sewer mains within the City’s sewer collection system that have low velocities, thus a good sewer cleaning program is imperative to minimize risk of sanitary sewer overflows.
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L R E S U L T S – F U T U R E F L O W
C O N D I T I O N S
As discussed, Figure 6-2 depicts the flow allocations that were used to analyze the future flow conditions in the model. It is important to understand that some of these deficient areas are due to a combination of multiple future developments. As stated previously, additional modeling should be performed during the planning and design phases of these future developments should wastewater flows , tie-in locations to the City’s collection system, or timing of future developments be different than what is shown on Figure 6-2.
Deficient System Capacity
The following locations were identified through the analysis as having insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying future wastewater flows. The future flow scenarios assume that all existing CIPs identified by the sewer m odel have been constructed. Figure 6 -6 shows a system - wide map of available capacity under future worst case peak conditions. Pipes with available capacity are shown in green, marginal capacity (within 10% of exceeding the maximum allowable hydraulic ca pacity) are shown in yellow, and above the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity are shown in red. Refer to Figure 6-7 for an overall map of the recommended areas for future pipe upgrades.
San Juan Grade
This section of pipe receives flow from the most northern part of the City, mainly from the residences of the Bolsa Knolls neighborhood. This pipe also receives some commercial flow, and flow from two schools.
The San Juan Grade Future CIP project upsizes approximately 3,800 ft of 8 -inch and 10- inch VCP to 12-inch PVC pipe from MH-C5-008 to MH-D4-055. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.33 to 1.0 during future peak flow conditions. Ten (10) of the MHs are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the future PHWWF condition. Upsizing would bring the d/D values down to a range between 0.24 to 0.60.
6-8
North Davis Road
The North Davis Road Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 240 ft of 18 -inch to 24-inch from MH-H3-009 to MH-H3-013, 1,700 ft. of 24 -inch to 30-inch from MH-H3- 013 near Cherokee Dr to MH -H2-002 at Calle del Adobe, and 3,400 ft. of 30 -inch to 32- inch from MH -H2-002 to MH -J2-047 at N Davis Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 43-100% full due to future flows. A majority of the future flows (81%) can be attributed to the West Area Specific Plan, with Target Area K contributing 15%, and Target Areal L contributing 4%.
It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Cherokee Drive CIP, and Existing Northridge Mall CIP have been constructed.
West Laurel Drive
The West Laurel Drive Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 1,550 ft. of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH -H4-001 at N Main St to MH -H3-023 near Laurel Park. Under peak future conditions, this segment on West Laurel Dri ve runs 66 -88% full. All future flows driving this project are from the Laurel Drive at North Main Street Focused Growth Area.
It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed.
Victor Street
The Victor Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,600 ft. of 15- inch to 18-inch from MH-J3-012 at Ashbury Way to MH-J2-007 at W Rossi St. Under peak future conditions, this segment along Victor St runs 73 -98% full. All future flows drivi ng this project are from the Laurel Drive at North Main Street Focused Growth Area.
It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed and Future West Laurel Dr. CIP has been constructed or will be constru cted concurrently.
Freedom Parkway
The Freedom Parkway Future CIP project recommends the upsize of approximately 2,025 ft of 10-inch pipe to 15-inch from MH-J9-005 at Estrella Way to MH-J9-001 at N Sanborn Rd. An additional 2,725 ft of 12 -inch pipe from M H-J9-001 to MH -I8-013 at Nogal Dr should be upsized to 18 -inch. Under peak future conditions, this segment on Freedom Parkway runs 50 -100% full and eight (8) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft. of the manhole rims. All future flows driving this project are from the East Area Specific Plan.
Natividad Creek Park
The Natividad Creek Park Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 230 ft of 18-inch to 21-inch from MH-H8-012 to MH-H8-004 and approximately 3,800 ft of 24 - inch to 27-inch from MH-H8-004 at Freedom Pkwy to MH-I7-005 at the Twin Creeks Golf Course. Under peak future conditions, this segment through Natividad Creek Park runs 76-100% full. The future flows driving this project are split between the East Area Specific Plan at 58% and Central Area Specific Plan at 42%.
6-9
It should be noted that this project assumes Future Freedom Pkwy CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.
East Alisal Street
The East Alisal Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 5,400 ft. of 15-inch to 18 -inch from MH -M8-010 near Bardin Rd to MH -M7-009 at Williams Rd.
Additionally, approximately 2,200 ft of 18 -inch should be upsized to 21 -inch from MH - M7-009 to MH-M6-012 at N Sanborn Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 67-100% full and fourteen (14) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rims.
All future flows driving this project are from the East Future Growth Area.
Abbott Street
The Abbot Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,30 0 ft of 12- inch to 15-inch from MH-Q7-001 at Harris Rd to MH-Q7-004. An additional 850 ft. of 12- inch pipe from MH-P6-015 to MH-P6-006 at Harkins Rd should be upsized to 15-inch, and 700 ft of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-P6-006. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full. Under future max day flows three (3) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim. The future flows driving this project are the East Future Growth Area at 59%, Target Area B at 39%, and Target Area F at 2%.
So uth Sanborn Road
In order to avoid upgrades at both South Sanborn and downstream of TP2, the South Sanborn Future CIP project proposes to increase the overflow elevation at MH-M6-012 to
65.09 ft in elevation (an additional 0.65 ft from Existing CIP Upstream TP2 Diversion). This hydraulic change would send future flows primarily down South Sanborn Road. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full and MH-N6-004 is surcharging. All future flows driving this project are from the East Future Growth Area.
This project proposes to upsize approximately 4,365 ft of 18 -inch to 21 -inch from MH - M6-012 at E Alisal St to MH O6 -006 at Pellet Ave, 500 ft of 21 -inch to 24-inch from MH O6-006 to MH O6-008 at Industrial St, and 1,500 ft of 24-inch to 27-inch from MH O6-008 to MH 05-002 near Abbott St. Since the overflow weir will send more flows down South Sanborn, these pipe upgrades will need to be constructed before the overflow elevation weir, ensuring that there is enough capacity to accommodate t he flows down South Sanborn.
It should be noted that there is a concrete "weir" at MH N6 -003 to stop South Sanborn Rd. flows from backing into Mayfair Dr. Detailed design for this project should consider raising the slope/invert on Mayfair Dr or increa sing the slope along South Sanborn to prevent further backwater effects.
It should also be noted that this project assumes Future East Alisal CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Legend
3Ú City Lift Stations
Modeled Sewer Pipes
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-1
WASTEWATER MODEL
OVERVIEW MAP
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad Street
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
Ag-Industrial
Center
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
^_ Future Flow Allocation
3Ú City Lift Stations
Modeled Sewer Pipes
City Boundary
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
North Boronda FGA
Central Area Specifc Plan
East Area Specific Plan
West Area Specific Plan
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-2
FUTURE FLOW ALLOCATION
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Target Area K: 122 gpm
Target Area L: 32 gpm
West Boronda FGA:
113 gpm
Laurel Dr at North Main St:
168 gpm
West Area
Specific Plan: 638 gpm
Central Area
Specific Plan: 253 gpm
Central Area Specific Plan: 327 gpm
East Area Specific Plan: 405 gpm
East Area Specific
Plan: 405 gpm
East Area FGA: 409 gpm
East Area FGA: 409 gpm
East Alisal St/East
Market St: 27 gpm (each)
Target Area V:
21 gpm (each)
North Main St/Soledad St:
88 gpm (each)
Abbott St:
101 gpm (each)
South Main St:
150 gpm
Target Area N:
18 gpm
Southeast Area FGA: 162 gpm
Target Area B: 109 gpm
Target Area F: 5 gpm
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center: 36 gpm
Southeast Area FGA: 162 gpm
Salinas Ag-IndustrialCenter:
19.9 gpm
270 gpm (Lift Station)
Bolsa Knolls: 67 gpm
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
W Market St
Davis Rd
Legend
3Ú City Lift Stations
Available Capacity
Exceeds Capacity
Marginal Capacity
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-3
EXISTING CAPACITY DURING
PEAK CONDITIONS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
"/ UPSTREAM TP2
FLOW DIVERSION
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
NATIVIDAD RD OR ALTERNATIVE
TYLER ST
NORTHRIDGE M
ALL
NOICE DR
CESARCHAVEZ PARK
CHEROKEE DR
Legend
Existing Sewer Upgrades
Modeled Sewer Pipes
"/ Upstream TP2 (M6-012)
3Ú City Lift Stations
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-4
EXISTING SEWER
UPGRADE PROJECTS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
W Market St
Davis Rd
Legend
Does Not Meet Minimum Velocity Criteria
Meets Minimum Velocity Criteria
3Ú City Lift Stations
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-5
LOW PIPE VELOCITY
DURING PEAK FLOW CONDITIONS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú3Ú
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad
Street
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Ag-Industrial
Center
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
3Ú Salinas Area Pump Station
3Ú City Lift Stations
Available Capacity
Marginal Capacity
Exceeds Capacity
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-6
FUTURE CAPACITY DURING
PEAK CONDITIONS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú
3Ú 3Ú
3Ú3Ú
SAN JUAN
GRADE
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
NATIVIDAD
CREEK
PARK
EAST ALISAL ST
VICTOR ST
WEST
LAUREL DR
NORTH
DAVIS RD
ABBOTT ST
FREEDOM
PKW
Y
SOUTH SANBORN RD
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad Street
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
W Market St
Davis Rd
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Ag-Industrial
Center
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
Future Sewer Upgrades
Modeled Sewer System
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
3Ú Salinas Area Pump Station
3Ú City Lift Stations
NOTES:
ESRI BASEMAP.
WALLACE GROUP DID
NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY
SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.
O
SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-7
FUTURE SEWER
UPGRADE PROJECTS
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
PLANNING
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS
WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
7-1
C H AP T E R 7
C A P I TA L I MPROV E M E NT PRO G R A M
This Chapter presents the proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP), with a brief description of the proposed projects and a preliminary cost estimate for each. Also included in the CIP recommendations are general timelines for the improvements. The Mark Thomas 2017 CCTV Evaluation and O&M projects discussed in Chapter 3 , I/I Evaluation discussed in Chapter 4, and Lift Station improvements discussed in Chapter 5 are included in the CIP.
B A S I S O F C A P I T A L I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M C O S T S
The CIP costs were developed based on engineering judgment, confirmed bid prices for similar work in Monterey County, consultation with vendors and contractors, established budgetary unit prices for the work, and other reliable sources. Hard construction costs are typically escalated by a factor of 1.4 to allow budget for “soft costs” that include preliminary engineering, engineering, administration, construction management and inspection costs. All CIP costs are express in Year 2022 dollars, using the McGr aw-Hill Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index of 13004 (May 2022). Actual project costs will vary depending on economic conditions at the time of construction and should be escalated to the year or years schedule for the work.
Sewer Main Upgrade Unit Costs
Table 7-1 provides costs for the recommended capital improvement projects. The unit cost for replacement of gravity sewers includes the proposed pipelines, lateral re -connections, sewer bypassing, and traffic control.
Construction methods such as pipe bursting and trenching were determined for different segments of each project depending on pipe conditions (existing sags, joint offsets, etc.) and number of lateral re -connections. Trenching was assumed for all new sewer main constructio n. Additionally, the City provided a GIS overlay of the known streets with concrete in the roadway. If the project required trenching in these roads, a unit cost was applied to account for removal and replacement of concrete in the roadway.
For the manhole condition assessment performed by the 2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation, the cost estimates for manhole repairs presented in Table 4 of the evaluation were escalated to Year 2022 dollars and used. The Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation can be found in Appendix B of this SSMPU.
7-2
T A B L E 7 - 1 . S E W E R M A I N C O N S T R U C T I O N U P G R A D E
U N I T C O S T S
C O N S T R U C T I O N T Y P E U N I T C O S T / L I N E A L F E E T 6 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $380
6 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $400
8 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $420
8 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $450
10 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $460
10 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $500
12 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $510
12 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $560
15 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $590
15 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $660
18 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $690
18 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $780
21 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $800
21 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $920
24 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $930
24 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,090
27 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,080
27 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,280
30 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,250
30 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,510
32 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,390
32 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,690
36 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,690
36 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $2,100
C O N C R E T E I N R O A D W A Y $65
M A N H O L E R E P L A C E M E N T $16,000 EACH
C O A T M A N H O L E $4,000 EACH
I N S P E C T I O N P O R T $3,500 EACH
7-3
C I P R A N K I N G
The existing capital improvement projects were rank ed to determine what priority the existing recommen ded projects should be constructed. These projects incl ude those identified through the hydraulic model, l ift station evaluation, Mark Thomas 2017 CCTV Evaluation, and the O&M repairs noted by City operations and maintenance crews.
Table 7-2 evaluates each of the projects in five categories: overflow to a water body of the State, if it meets design criteria, if it is identified by the City as a main tenance hot spot, its community impact, and if it i s near a City manhole monitor that alerts crews if a manhole is s urcharging. With input from the City, each category was provided a weighted importance factor based on the relative importance of the category. The importance factor is multiplied by the score of the project received and then added together to determine its final score.
It is recommended that the City review these projec ts periodically to determine if any substantial cha nges have occurred that may re-prioritize a project to a high er ranking. The future capital improvement projects were not ranked since they are determined by construction of the future developments that were identified for this SSMPU.
Lift Station CIPs
Lift Station CIPs have been categorized in two sepa rate ways: one based on improvements needed at each lift station as a whole and the other based on improveme nt project type for all lift stations. Table 7-3 ra nks each individual lift station based on eight categories: overflow to a water body, inspection frequency, existing pumping capacity deficiencies, peak hour emergency response time, if bypassing capabilities are needed, if an onsite generator with automatic transfer switch is needed, if control system upgrades are needed, and potential impact to the community. Although not included in the scoring, Table 7-3 also shows if the lift station would be impacted by future development. This criterion is important to consider if the lift station is being considered for upgrade and the likelihood of the upgrade being impacted by future development.
The other categorization of lift station improvements is based on project type. The following projects have been grouped together and ranked by City staff. See cutsheets at the end of this chapter for the lift stations that these projects apply to.
1. Controller Upgrades and Standardization
2. Install Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water
3. Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
4. Generator Replacement
5. Onsite Standby Generator
6. Power Receptacle
7. Painting/Coating Maintenance
Depending on timing of full replacement of the lift stations, it may be recommended to upgrade lift st ation components that will aid in operation and maintenance, which are the Projects #1-7 noted above. This will allow time for the City to develop a funding plan for full replacement. This excludes Lake Street Lift Station, which needs full replacement immediately.
7-4
T I M I N G O F R E C O M M E N D E D I M P R O V E M E N T S The existing capital improvement projects are triggered by existing deficiencies, while the future capital improvement projects are triggered by one or more future developments connecting to the City’s collection system. All projects identified as existing deficiencies based on the hydraulic model or O&M and are detailed out in Table 7-4. These existing projects are due to existing wastewater flows, but it is also important for these projects to be completed to accommodate future wastewater flows. All lift station existing CIP projects are detailed in Table 7-5. These existing projects are recommended to be completed within the next 1 -7 years. The last four projects are unranked but are still considered existing deficiencies to be addressed by the City . The Inflow/Infiltration evaluation should be performed during a significant wet weather year in the next 1-5 years. The CCTV Inspection program should evaluate the entire collection system every 5 years or approximately 20% of the system per year. The brick ma nhole and flushing inlet replacements are considered lower priority due to the ongoing nature of the projects as the City performs continuous inspection of these area. Over the next 15 years, all brick manholes should be coated or replaced and all flushing inlets should be replaced with an 8-inch inspection port or new manhole.
The future capital improvement projects are triggered by potential future development. Since the timing of these projects and wastewater flow projections have not been finalized, it is recommended that additional modeling be performed during the planning and design phases of these future developments. The future projects presented in Table 7-6 assume the future wastewater flow allocations shown in Figure 6-2.
Recommended projects have not been evaluated for potential environmental impacts as a part o f this study.
Projects will be subject to the requirements of CEQA prior to approval and funding.
Following the tables, Figures 7 -1 to 7 -33 are project description sheets are provided for the sewer projects identified by sewer modeling (both existing and future) and the lift station upgrades (by lift station or project type). These description sheets can be used by City staff in the planning for each project and for inclusion in fiscal year budget requests.
Exhibit 1 in Appendix F shows all sewer upgrade projects and the sewer repairs noted by City crews.
TABLE 7-2
CITY OF SALINAS SSMPU
EXISTING HYDRAULIC AND MAINTENANCE REPAIR CIP RANKING MATRIX Importance Factor 5 4 3 2 1
Overflow to Water
Body of the State Design Standard Maintenance Hot Spo t Community Impact Near City Manhole Monitor Impacted By Future Development Yes - 10
No - 0
Meets Design Standard - 0
Doesn't Meet Design Standards - 2
Surcharging - 5
Overflowing - 10
Not Critical - 0
Yearly Check - 5
Weekly or Monthly Checks - 10
< 5,000 - 0
5,001 to 10,000 - 5
>10,000 - 10
Yes-5
No-0 Yes/No
Cesar Chavez Park
(includes North Madeira Avenue Repairs) Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 5 10 0 Yes, East Alisal Redevelopment 105 1 Upper Carr Lake Repairs O&M 10 0 10 10 0 Yes, North Boronda FGA 100 2 Upstream TP2 Diversion Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 0 10 0 No 90 3 Northridge Mall Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 0 10 0 Yes, Target area K 90 4 East Market and Upstream of Lake Street Repairs O&M 1 0 0 5 5 0 No 75 5 Louis & Van Buren Repairs O&M 10 0 5 0 5 No 70 6
West Market at Davis Overcrossing O&M 10 0 5 0 0 Yes, West Boronda FGA 65 7 Cherokee Dr Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 10 5 Yes, Target Area K 45 8 Malarin St and Wilgart Way Repairs O&M 0 5 5 5 0 No 45 9 Romie Lane Repairs & Reconfiguration Analysis O&M 0 0 10 5 0 No 40 10 King Street Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 11
Del Monte and Mae Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 12
Riker Street Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 13
West Market Street Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 14
Johnson Place Repairs O&M 0 5 5 0 0 No 35 15
N Main St Hwy 101 Underpass Bunker Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 Yes, Target area V 30 16 Donner Way Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 No 30 17
San Miguel Ave Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 No 30 18
Noice Drive/Tyler Street Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 5 0 No 30 19 Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 5 0 Yes, Target area V, north boronda FGA 30 20 Acacia, Bautista, Woodside Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 No 20 21 Comanche, Polk, and North First Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 Yes, Target area K 20 22 Sherwood Dr Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 Yes, Target area V 20 23 East Laurel and Williams Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 24 Hoover Street Repair O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 25
Project Name
Score =
Importance
Factor X Points Ranking Type of Project
7-5
TABLE 7-2
CITY OF SALINAS SSMPU
EXISTING HYDRAULIC AND MAINTENANCE REPAIR CIP RANKING MATRIX Importance Factor 5 4 3 2 1
Overflow to Water
Body of the State Design Standard Maintenance Hot Spo t Community Impact Near City Manhole Monitor Impacted By Future Development Yes - 10
No - 0
Meets Design Standard - 0
Doesn't Meet Design Standards - 2
Surcharging - 5
Overflowing - 10
Not Critical - 0
Yearly Check - 5
Weekly or Monthly Checks - 10
< 5,000 - 0
5,001 to 10,000 - 5
>10,000 - 10
Yes-5
No-0 Yes/NoProject Name
Score =
Importance
Factor X Points RankingType of Project
Katherine Ave & Pajaro St Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 26 Wood Street Reconfiguration Analysis O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 27 Inflow/Infiltration Evaluation Hydraulic
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dependent on
significant wet
weather year
CCTV Inspection Program O&M -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Annual Program Brick Manhole Inspection & Replacement O&M -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Ongoing Inspection Flushing Inlet (Cleanout) Inspection & Replacement O &M -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Ongoing Inspection 7-6
TABLE 7-3
CITY OF SALINAS SSMPU
EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP RANKING MATRIX
Importance Factor 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 1
Overflow to Water
Body of the State Inspection Frequency
Existing Pumping
Capacity Deficiencies
Peak Hour Emergency Response
Time Bypass Required?
Onsite Generator with Automatic
Transfer Switch Required?
Critical Control/Electronic
Upgrades Required? Community Impact
Impacted By Future
Development
Yes - 10
No - 0
Emergency Callouts-10
Daily Inspections-5
Weekly Inspections-0
Yes-10
No-0
0-15 minutes-10
15-30 minutes-5
Greater than 30 minutes-0
Yes-5
No-0
Yes-5
Replace Generator-3
No-0
Yes-5
No-0
< 5,000 - 0
5,001 to 10,000 - 5
>10,000 - 10 Yes/No
Lake St Lift Station 10 10 10 10 0 3 5 10
Yes, Target Area V, East
Alisal Street/East Market
Street, Central Area and
East Area Specific Plans,
and East Area FGA
Pumps must be upsized
for future flows.
176 1
Santa Rita Lift Station 10 10 0 10 5 3 5 5
Bolsa Knolls Septic
Conversion & Target Area
K 151 2
Carpenter Hall Lift Station 10 5 0 10 5 3 0 10
Yes, North Boronda FGA
and Targe Areas K & V 126 3
De La Torre Lift Station 10 10 0 0 5 5 5 0
Possible, Southeast FGA
Pumps may need to be
upsized for future flows 120 4
Spicer Lift Station 10 10 0 0 5 5 5 0 No 120 5
Mill Lake Lift Station 10 5 0 10 5 0 5 0 No 120 6
Vista Nueva Lift Station 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 No 90 7
Las Casitas Lift Station 10 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 No 90 8
TP2 Lift Station 10 0 0 0 5 3 0 10
Yes, East Alisal
Street/East Market Street
and East FGA.
Pumps must be upsized
for future flows. 76 9
Harkins Lift Station 0 10 0 0 5 5 5 0
Yes, Salinas Ag-
Industrial Center
Pumps must be upsized
for future flows 70 10
Airport Lift Station 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes, Southeast FGA 50 11 Project Name
Score =
Importance
Factor X Points Ranking
7-7
TABLE 7-4.
CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Lake St 2,100 15 18 Acosta Plz Garner Ave to E Laurel
Dr J7-007 K7-017
Lake St 3,000 21 24 Open Space/Park E Laurel Dr to near Circle Dr K7-017 L6-001
Lake St 3,500 24 27 Open Space/Park Circle Dr to Longbow Way L6-001 K5-007
New sewer main Lake St 70 -- 24 Open Space/Park Near York shire Way K5-007 K5-014
1.1 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Minor defects, needs new frame and cover, lining
interior of manhole (Garde:10) (K5-001); Visible
agregate and broken frame, needs new frame & cover,
lining interior of manhole (Grade: 3) (K5-003); Pipe
(Grade:4),WLS of 0.6, encrustations
Lake St 380 24 24 N Madeira Ave
N Madeira north of
Cesar Chavez park
between St Helen Way
and Terrace St
K5-001 K5-003 $438,000 $175,200 $613,200
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New MH frame and cover, install marker (Grade:5)
(MH I6-004); expose and raise MH- curently buried
(Grade:10) (I6-006); New MH frame and cover, install
marker (Grade:10) (I6-005); (I6-004 to I6-006) Pipe
WLS =0.35, root ball, (Grade: 3); (I6-006 to I6-005 )
(Grade:2)
Lake St 410 21 21 Laurel Dr. Bike Trail Near
Veteran's Way I6-004 I6-005 $396,500 $158,600 $555,100
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New MH frame & cover w/ PCC collar, line in 5 yrs
(Grade:3) (J6-001); New frame & cover w/ PCC collar,
line in 5 yrs (Grade:3) (J6-002);Pipe d/D: 0.75, grease deposits (Grade: 10)
Lake St 300 27 27 Trail around Upper
Carr Lake
Off of E Laurel Dr near
Veteran's Way J6-001 J6-002 $406,000 $162,400 $568,400
$802,500 $321,000 $1,123,500
3 Upstream TP2 Diversion Weir Construction TP2 -- -- -- East Alisal St South Sanbo rn Rd M6-012 -- $45,000 $18,000 $63,000 Upsize sewer main -- 2,300 15 18 North Main St
From East Boronda
Road to San Juan
Grade Road
E4-007 F4-011
Sewer Main Connection/Realignment -- 320 -- 18 North Mai n St From Big 5 Sporting Goods to Harden Pkwy F4-007 F4-031
Northridge Mall 4
Upper Carr Lake Repairs
$1,916,000
Upsize sewer main Cesar Chavez Park
$766,400 $2,682,400
2 $3,347,600 $11,716,600 $8,369,000 1
CCTV evaulation noted pipe encrustations and manholes need new frames, covers, and lining in a portion of the Cesar Chavez Park CIP. These repairs are noted below and should be replaced if Cesar Chavez Park CIP is not constructed in the near term.
Total Repair Project Costs
7-8
TABLE 7-4.
CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Expose and raise MH to grade, buried (Grade:10) (K5-
008)
Lake St -- -- -- Yorshire Way
Yorkshire Way, between
Longbow Way and
Doncaster Pl
K5-008 -- $5,900 $2,360 $8,260
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Expose and raise MH to grade, buried (Grade:10) (K5-
010); Pipe broken, encrustations (Grade:5)
Lake St 150 24 24 Longbow Way Long bow Way and Kern
St K5-009 K5-010 $169,400 $67,760 $237,160
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Replace frame & cover w PCC collar, reline, Corroded
frame & chimney (Grade: 10) (K5-012); Replace
Frame & cover w PCC collar, install marker, corrosion,
grease and surcharge (Grade:10) (K5-021); Pipe
cracks, grease deposits, (Grade:3); Replace frame &
cover w PCC collar, install marker, corroded frame and
aggregate (Grade:3) (K5-019); Replace frame & cover,
install ecc. Cone for fence, corroded frame & heavy
grease & surch. (Grade:10) (K5-020); Pipe WLS:
0.25,d/D:0.9, grease deposits (Grade:2)
Lake St 840 24 & 30 24 & 30 East of Sun St Between Sun St and HWY 101 K5-012, K5-019 K5-020, K5-021 $1,125,100 $450,040 $1,57 5,140 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New frame & cover, lining interior of manhole
(Grade:10) (L4-002 and L4-004)
Lake St -- -- -- E Market St E Market St, between
Sun St and Peach Dr L4-002 L4-004 $23,800 $9,520 $33,320 $1,324,200 $529,680 $1,853,880
Pipe sags, surcharging manholes Santa Rita 260 8 8 Louis e St Louise St, between Lenny St and Louise Ct D5-001 D4-003 $149,000 $59,600 $208,600 Pipe sags, surcharging manholes Santa Rita 70 8 8 Van Bu ren Ave near East Bolivar St D4-007 D4-055 $63,500 $25,4 00 $88,900 $212,500 $85,000 $297,500
7 West Market at Davis
Overcrossing Bunker doors on Large Trunk line need replacement - - -- -- -- West Market St N Davis Road Overcrossing J2-045 K2-038 $13,350 $5,340 $18,690
8 Cherokee Drive Upsize sewer main -- 1,600 18 24 Cherokee Dr From Seminole Way to Tulane Street G3-008 H3-009 $1,920,000 $768,000 $2,688,000 Pipe issue joints, roots -- 380 8 8 Wilgart Way Wilgart Way, E Romie Ln to FI O4-050 O4-011 $171,000 $68,400 $239,400
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Heavy corrosion, reline manhole (Grade:4) -- -- -- -- Near Railroad Between Work St and
Brunken Ave, near
railroad
N5-003 -- $9,300 $3,720 $13,020
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Grease deposits and surcharging, recommend PCC
collar to prevent I/I, new bench and rechannelize
(Grade:10)
-- -- -- -- Los Palos Dr
Near intersection of Los
Palos Dr and Fairmont
Dr
O5-019 -- $6,300 $2,520 $8,820
$186,600 $74,640 $261,240
10 Romie Lane Repairs &
Reconfiguration Analysis
Hydrogen Sulfide damage, MH rings and lids need
replacement. Concrete in roadway. Recommended
reconfiguration analysis before repairs.
4,030 18 18 Romie Lane Near Los Palos Drive to
South Main Street O4-007 N3-002 -- $100,000 $100,000
11 King Street Repairs Major pipe sags TP2 1,170 8 10 King St King St, E Market to E Alisal L5-033 L5-039 $585,000 $234,000 $819,000
Trough pipe missing in MH Lake St -- -- -- C Street On C St, Galindo St to Mae Ave -- K8-012 $16,000 $6,400 $22,400
Pipe sags, needs replacement Lake St 820 8 8 Del Monte A ve Del Monte Ave, Mae Ave to Green St K8-011 J8-020 $369,000 $147,600 $516,600 Total Louise and Van Buren St Repair Project Costs
5 9
The Louis and Van Buren maintenance repairs are alo ng the future San Juan Grade CIP. These segments should be replaced if the future San Juan Grade CIP is not constructed in the near term. 12 Del Monte and Mae Repairs
Total Repair Project Costs
East Market and Upstream
of Lake Street Repairs
Total Repair Project Costs
Louise and Van Buren
Street Repair6
Malarin St and Wilgart Way
Repairs
7-9
TABLE 7-4.
CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Pipe sags, broken pipe, trough and pipe are gone Lak e St 830 6 6 Mae Ave Mae Ave, D St to Del Monte J8-008 K8-013 $332,000 $132,800 $464,800
$717,000 $286,800 $1,003,800
13 Riker Street Repair Pipe has damage and missing sections at manhole -- 20 6 6 Riker Street Lang Street -- M3-035 $8,000 $3,200 $11,200 Pipe has major sags, consider re-alignment of secti on.
Concrete in roadway. -- 450 8 8 Villa Street At Villa St and Kirkwood Ave L2-016 K3-016 $231,750 $92,700 $324,450
Both F.I.'s are blown out -- -- -- -- West Market St Near El Cerrito Market L3-043 L3-010 $32,000 $12,800 $44,800 Pipe sags. Concrete in roadway. -- 840 6 6 Capitol St Capitol St, W Market St to Archer St L3-013 L3-040 $336,000 $134,400 $470,400
Pipe sags. Concrete in roadway. Replace F.I. with new
manhole. -- 710 6 6 Capitol St Capitol St, Archer St to F.I. L3-041 F.I $346,150 $138,460 $484,610
$945,900 $378,360 $1,324,260
15 Johnson Place Repairs Pipe damage, sags, spidering under tracks, ongoing backups, MH O5-005 has settled, always surcharging -- 1,470 12 12 Johnson Pl Johnson Pl Abbott Pl to railroad tracks N5-011 O5-005 $839,200 $335,680 $1,174,880 16 N Main St Hwy 101
Underpass Bunker Repair
Bunker damage to pipe, pipe missing at bunker on
both sides, clogging -- 50 10 10 N Main St N Main St at Hwy 101 J4-012 J4-013 $2 5,000 $10,000 $35,000 17 Donner Way Pipe damages, sags, etc. Carpenter Hall 280 8 8 Donner W ay Truckee Way to Emerald Dr G6-037 G6-060 $126,000 $50,400 $176,400
18 San Miguel Ave Repair Pipe Damage; broken pipe 10-feet from manhole -- 10 8 8 Pajaro St Pajaro St and San Miguel 04-025 O3-038 $4,500 $1,800 $6,300
Upsize sewer main -- 2,100 8 12 Noice Dr From Chaparral Street to East Laurel Drive G4-015 H4-011
Reconstruct manhole -- -- -- -- E Laurel Dr East Laurel Drive near N Main Street H4-012 --
New sewer main -- 60 -- 12 E Laurel Dr East Laurel Drive to North Main Street H4-006 H4-001
Upsize sewer main -- 3,300 12 15 Tyler Street West Laurel Drive down to HWY 101 H3-023 I3-001
Upsize sewer main Carpenter Hall 2,700 12 15 Natividad R d From near Sausal Drive to East Alvin Drive G6-002 H6-003
Weir Construction Carpenter Hall -- -- -- Natividad Rd Ea st Alvin Drive H6-003 -- Carpenter Hall 3,600 15 18 Natividad Rd East Alvin Drive to near East Laurel Drive H6-003 I5-007
Carpenter Hall 305 12 15 Off of Sherwood Dr
From Sherwood Drive
toward East Bernal
Drive
J5-003 J5-005
Carpenter Hall 2,000 15 18 Parallel to E Bernal
Dr and N Main St
From near Sherwood Dr
to Santa Clara Ave J5-005 J4-010
-- 2,400 15 21 Natividad Rd East Alvin Drive to
Pacheco St H6-003 I5-011
-- 5,000 15 24 Natividad Rd to Sherwood Park on
East Bernal Drive I5-011 J4-022
-- 1,100 21 30 Easement Portion along Alpine Dr J4-022 J4- 011 -- 620 21 30 J4-011 K4-002
Total Repair Project Costs
14 $3,400,000 $4,760,000
West Market Street Repairs
Under Highway 101
$9,120,000Alternative Natividad
Consolidation Upsize sewer main
Upsize sewer main
$6,090,000 $2,436,000 $8,526,000
20 $1,360,000Noice Drive/Tyler Street19
$3,648,000 $12,768,000
Natividad Rd
Total Repair Project Costs
7-10
TABLE 7-4.
CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Pipe Sags, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 130 8 8 Acac ia Circle North W Acacia St F.I. N3-039 $74,500 $29,800 $104,300 Pipe Sags -- 280 8 8 Woodside Dr Woodside Dr, Teakwood
Pl to Riker St O3-016 O3-015 $126,000 $50,400 $176,400
Pipe Sags -- 490 8 8 Bautista Dr Bautista Dr, W Romie
Ln to Orange Dr N3-014 N3-060 $220,500 $88,200 $308,700 Pipe issue joints, roots, offsets, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 230 8 8 Bautista Dr Bautista Dr, F.I to W
Acacia F.I N3-029 $119,500 $47,800 $167,300
$540,500 $216,200 $756,700
Pipe issue, joints, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 690 6 6 Comanche Way Shawnee Way to Cherokee Dr F.I. G3-010 $292,000 $116,800 $408,800
Pipe issue joints, roots, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 490 8 8 Polk St Polk St, Monroe St to W Laurel Dr F.I. I3-045 $236,500 $94,600 $331,100
Pipe sags -- 640 8 8 N 1st St N 1st St, Boeing Ave, W
Curtis St H4-061 H4-054 $288,000 $115,200 $403,200
$816,500 $326,600 $1,143,100
23 Sherwood Dr Repairs Pipe cracks at 220-ft mark downstream from K4-052.
Obstruction (possibly old water line) in K4-076 Lake St 840 12 12 Sherwood Dr Near Sioux Dr to E Rossi St K4-052 K4-076 $486,400 $194,560 $680,960
Pipe sags, broken pipe -- 450 10 10 Easement E Laurel Dr at 105 Oregon St K7-011 K7-014 $225,000 $90,000 $315,000
Pipe sags -- 1,080 8 8 Williams Rd Williams Rd, E Market St to Quilla St L7-009 M7-006 $486,000 $194,400 $680,400 $711,000 $284,400 $995,400
25 Hoover Street Repair F.I. repair blown out Santa Rita -- -- -- Hoover Street 1 885 Hoover Street -- -- $16,000 $6,400 $22,400 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Exposed aggregate & heavy corrosion,fiberglass
peeling, weld cover, recommend reline manhole, new
bench, and rechannelize (Grade:10) (O4-001);
Welded/broken cover, recommend new frame & cover
(Grade:10), (O4-002); Pipe d/D 0.85 (Grade: 1)
-- -- -- -- Katherine Ave Katherine Ave and
Alameda Ave O4-001 O4-002 $16,800 $6,720 $23,520
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Corrosion, broken cover, rechannel, needs new
manhole (Grade:10)
-- -- -- -- Pajaro St Pajaro St near Katherine
Ave O4-006 NA $14,600 $5,840 $20,440
$31,400 $12,560 $43,960
27 Wood Street
Reconfiguration Analysis
Pipe sags, always plugs, can't CCTV
Entire area needs reconfiguration Lake St 1,820 -- -- Easement Between Wood and Roosevelt Street L5-029 L5-034 -- $50,000 $50,000
-- CCTV Program CCTV inspection of 20% (approximately 58 miles) of the collection system each year All -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- $9,392,000 $9,392,000 -- Inflow/Infiltration
Evaluation
Conduct full I/I evaluation of the entire collection
system (during significant wet weather year) and
update the sewer model
All -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- $140,000 $140,000
Coat: $432,000 Coat: $172,800 Coat: $604,800
New Manhole: $1,728,000 New Manhole: $691,200 New Manhole: $2,419,200 Inspection Port: $4,910,500 Inspection Port: $1,964, 200 Inspection Port: $6,874,700 New Manhole: $22,448,000 New Manhole: $8,979,200 New Manhole: $31,427,200 $59-$90 millionEXISTING SEWER PROJECT CIP TOTAL COSTS
Total Repair Project Costs
Total Repair Project Costs
-- --
-- --
--
Brick Manhole Inspection &
Coat/New Manhole
Replacement
Inspect and replace brick manholes
(108 based on field survey and City input) All -- -- -- -- -- --
Flushing Inlet (Cleanout)
Inspection & Port/New
Manhole Replacement
Inspect and replace flushing inlets/cleanouts
(1,403 based on City GIS) All -- --
Acacia, Bautista, Woodside
Repairs21
-- -- --
*Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
East Laurel and Williams
Repairs24
Total Repair Project Costs
Total Repair Project Costs
26 Katherine Ave & Pajaro St
Repairs
22 Comanche, Polk, and North
First Repairs
7-11
TABLE 7-5.
CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING LIFT STATIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area (Acres)
PHDW
Flow
(gpm)
Firm
Capacity Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
1 Lake Street Lift Station Full lift station replacement/relocation, see cutsheet for summary 4,108 6,375 -13% 146 East Rossi
Street
Intersection of E Lake St
and E Rossi St across
from Monterey County
Housing Alliance
K4-022 K4-019 9,500,000 3,800,000 13,300,000
2 Santa Rita Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary 348 670 112% 2021 Sucre Court Behind the parking lot of Salinas Valley Motel D4-019 -- 3,500,000 1,400,000 4,900,000 3 Spicer Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary 79 99 107% 59 Spicer St On Spicer street near A & S Metals N5-009 N5-007 2,200,000 880,000 3,080,000
4 Mill Lake Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary 43 132 287% 81 Gardenia Dr Off of Heather Circle J4-020 I3-001 2,750,000 1,100,000 3,850,000 5 Carpenter Hall Lift
Station
Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for
summary 508 1,226 31% 516 North Main St Behind the Coast Auto Insurance parking lot J4-011 K4-002 1,050,000 420,000 1,470,000 6 De La Torre Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary 10 7 4845% 1200 De La Torre
St
Across De La Torre St
from Inns of California
Salinas
O7-001 N7-009 1,200,000 480,000 1,680,000
7 Vista Nueva Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary 6 41 408% 704 Garner Ave Off Garner Ave near
Natividad Creek J7-034 J7-014 2,200,000 880,000 3,080,000 8 Harkins Road Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary 146 135 175% 1200 Harkins Rd
Intersection of Dayton St
and Harkins Rd Q6-001 Q6-009 1,300,000 520,000 1,820,000 9 Las Casitas Lift
Station
Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for
summary 38 137 189% 721 Las Casitas Dr
Near intersection of
Ranchero Dr and Las
Casitas Dr
I7-001 -- 650,000 260,000 910,000
10 TP2 Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary 136 279 99% 650 Elvee Dr
Across Alisal Creek from
Fleet Service Center N5-006 N5-022 2,500,000 1,000,000 3,500,000 11 Airport Lift Station Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for summary 584 60 960% 730 La Guardia St
South west corner of the
Ramco Enterprise LP
parking lot
O8-004 O8-005 800,000 320,000 1,120,000
38,710,000 EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP TOTAL PROJECT COSTS *Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work. 7-12
TABLE 7-6.
CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
San Juan Grade Upsize sewer main Santa Rita 3,800 8 and 10 12 San Juan Grade Road From Russell Rd to Van Buren Ave C5-008 D4-055 $2,370,000 $948,000 $3,318,000
-- 240 18 24 Tulane Street Between Cherokee Dr
and US HWY 101 H3-009 H3-013
-- 1,700 24 30 N Davis Rd HWY 101 to Calle del
Adobe H3-013 H2-002
-- 3,400 30 32 Parallel to N Davis Rd
Calle del Adobe to
intersect with N Davis
Rd near Rossi Rico
Parkway
H2-002 J2-047
West Laurel Drive Upsize sewer main -- 1,550 12 15 W Laurel Dr From N Main St to near Laurel Park H4-001 H3-023 $1,020,000 $408,000 $1,428,000 Victor Street Upsize sewer main -- 1,600 15 18 Victor St From Ashby Way to W Rossi St J3-012 J2-007 $1,250,000 $500,000 $1,750,000
Lake St 2,025 10 15 Freedom Parkway From Estrella Way to N Sanborn Rd J9-005 J9-001
Lake St 2,725 12 18 Freedom Parkway From N Sanborn Rd to Nogal Dr J9-001 I8-013
Lake St 230 18 21 Natividad Creek Park
Crossing Freedom
Parkway to Natividad
Creek Park
H8-002 H8-004
Carpenter Hall 3,800 24 27 Natividad Creek Park
Natividad Creek Park to
Twin Creeks Golf
Course
H8-004 I7-005
-- 5,400 15 18 E Alisal St From Bardin Rd to
Williams Rd M8-010 M7-009
Part in TP2 2,200 18 21 E Alisal St From Williams Rd to S Sanborn Rd M7-009 M6-012
-- 1,300 12 15 Abbott St From Harris Rd Q7-001 Q7-004
-- 850 12 15 Abbott St To Harkins Rd P6-015 P6-006
-- 700 15 18 Harkins Rd From Abbot St toward
Schilling Pl P6-006 after P6-003
(no City ID)
$1,836,000
$768,000
$2,312,000Upsize sewer mainEast Alisal Street
North Davis Road
Freedom Parkway Upsize sewer main
Upsize sewer main $8,430,000 $11,802,000$3,372,000
$1,312,000$3,280,000 $4,592,000
$2,688,000
$6,426,000Upsize sewer mainNatividad Creek Park $4,590,000 $5,780,000
Abbott Street Upsize sewer main $1,920,000
$8,092,000
7-13
TABLE 7-6.
CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
Increase Overflow
Elevation TP2 -- -- 65.09 ft
(elevation) S Sanborn Rd S Sanborn at E Alisal St -- M6-012 -- 4,365 18 21 S Sanborn Rd From E Alisal St to
Pellet Ave M6-012 O6-006
-- 500 21 24 S Sanborn Rd From Pellet Ave to
Industrial St O6-006 O6-008
-- 1,500 24 27 S Sanborn Rd From Industrial St to
near Abbott St O6-008 O5-002
$48,468,000
*Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work. $2,392,000
Upsize Sewer Main
South Sanborn Road $5,980,000 $8,372,000
7-14
Existing CIP Project #1: Cesar Chavez Park
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $8,369,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,347,600 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $11,716,600 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Cesar Chavez Park Existing CIP project proposes to upsize approximately 2,100 feet of 15-inch pipe to 18-inch pipe from MH-J7-007 near Garner Ave to MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr. These pipe segments run 66% to 95% full during existing peak flow conditions. This project also proposes upsizing approximately 3,000 ft of 21-inch pipe to 24-inch from MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr to MH-L6-001 near Circle Dr. These pipe segments run 39% to 100% full during existing peak conditions. Four (4) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in this section. An additional 3,500 ft of 24- inch should be upgraded to 27-inch from manhole L6-001 near Circle Dr to manhole K5-007 near Longbow Way. These pipe segments run at 60% to 85% full during existing peak flow conditions. The existing 21-inch and 24-inch pipe sizes are based on as-built records and should be field verified before upsizing.
In addition to the pipe replacements, it is also proposed to construct approximately 70 ft of new 24-inch pipe from MH- K5-007 to MH-K5-014 to split flow between 24-inch and 30-inch parallel mains.
It should be noted that CCTV evaluation recorded pipe encrustations and manholes condition repairs for the pipe segment between K5-001 and K5-003.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #1: Cesar Chavez Park
SEE BELOW, TOP RIGHT
Existing CIP Project #3: Upstream TP2 Diversion
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $45,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $18,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $63,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Upstream TP2 Diversion Existing CIP project proposes to divert flows along East Alisal to South Sanborn Rd. by increasing the invert at MH-M6-012 by 0.35 ft. This will cause the 18-inch along East Alisal to act as an overflow line, lessening the flow just downstream of TP2 which currently runs at 91-100% full under existing peak conditions.
It should be noted that future flows will affect this CIP, causing a need to upsize along South Sanborn Rd (see Future CIP South Sanborn Road).
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #3: Upstream TP2 Diversion
Existing CIP Project #4: Northridge Mall
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,916,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $766,400 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,682,400 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Northridge Mall Existing CIP project proposes the upsizing of approximately 2,300 ft of 15-inch pipe to 18-inch from MH E4-007 to MH F4-011 along N Main St. These pipe segments run 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. It is also recommended to connect the 18-inch pipe at F4-007 to the 27-inch pipe at MH F4-031, abandoning 1,800 feet of the parallel 12-inch line along North Main Street from MH F4-031 to G4-005. This connection will require trenching in a roadway where concrete has been identified. A cost per lineal foot to remove and replace the concrete has been added to the construction cost. With current conditions, six (6) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #4: Northridge Mall
Existing CIP Project #8: Cherokee Drive
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,920,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $768,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,688,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
1. Construction costs AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Cherokee Dr Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 1,600 feet of 18-inch pipe with 24-inch pipe on Cherokee Dr from Seminole Way (MH-G3-008) to Tulane St (MH-H3-009). Cherokee Dr has insufficient capacity for existing conditions. These pipes segments run 67% to 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. Four (4) of the twelve (12) manholes in this section are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #8: Cherokee Drive
Existing CIP Project #19: Noice Drive/Tyler Street
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $3,400,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,360,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,760,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Noice Dr/ Tyler St Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,100 feet of 8-inch pipe to 12-inch pipe on Noice Dr from MH-G4-015 at Chaparral St to MH-H4-011 at E Laurel Dr. This pipe segment runs 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. It is also recommended to reconstruct MH-H4-012 to match inverts and change the flow direction from MH-H4-011 to MH-H4-012. Additionally, it is recommended that approximately 60 ft of new 12-inch pipe be constructed to connect MH-H4-006 to MH-H4-001 at West Laurel Dr and North Main St. This new pipe will relieve the parallel 8-inch lines along North Main St that exceeds capacity under existing peak flow conditions. Finally, approximately 3,300 feet of 12-inch pipe along West Laurel Dr. and Tyler St. from MH-H3-023 to MH-I3-001 should be upsized to 15-inch. Sixteen (16) of the twenty (20) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #19: Noice Drive/Tyler Street
Existing CIP Project #20: Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $6,090,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,436,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,526,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
The Natividad Rd CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,700 feet of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH-G6-002 to MH-H6-003. These pipe segments run 85% to 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. This project recommends an overflow weir be constructed 0.5 ft in MH-H6-003 to make the 12-inch parallel an overflow pipe. Approximately 3,600 ft of 15-inch pipe should be replaced with 18-inch from MH-H6-003 to MH-I5-007. These pipe segments run 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. At Sherwood Dr, approximately 305 ft of 12-inch pipe from MH-J5-003 to MH- J5-005 should be upsized to 15-inch and approximately 2,000 ft of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-J5-005 to MH-J4-010.
These segments of pipe are running at 100% full at existing peak flow conditions. Eighteen (18) of the manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.
As an alternative, the Natividad Consolidation CIP proposes to abandon the parallel 12-inch overflow and upsize the approximately 7,400 ft of 15-inch pipe to 21-inch from MH-H6-003 to MH-I5-011 and 24-inch from MH-I5-011 to MH-J4- 022, as well as upsize approximately 1,100 feet of 21-inch line to 30-in line from MH-J4-022 to MH-K4-002. Note, the last segment of this CIP proposes to upsize 620 feet of 21-inch to 30-inch under HWY 101.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing CIP Project #20: Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Lift Station
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $9,500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engin eering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,800,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $13,300,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Lake Street Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Lake Street Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
Relocate lift station across the street on the east side of West Rossi Street. The costs are for a full lift station replacement. Costs include replacement of forcemain. Costs do not include any land acquisition.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $3,500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,400,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,900,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Santa Rita Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Santa Rita Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.
Electrical Upgrades
Install control cabinet above grade
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Repair broken conduit between dry and wet well
Seal all penetrations into the dry well
Upgrade Micro-Mac control system
Move conduit underground
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency bypass system
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair wet well coating
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow
Construction Cost 1 $2,200,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $880,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Spicer
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Spicer
City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Up gr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.
Electrical Upgrades
Install cabinet above grade
Installing a transfer switch for emergency back-up generator Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Replace conduit in wet well
Upgrade the SCADA control system
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair leak in the 6" force main in the dry well
Install removeable bollards at the dry well
Install emergency bypass system
Coat the wet well
Repair coating on the floor of the dry well
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Perform study to determine if the wet well can be relocated outside of the street.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $2,750,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,100,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,850,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Mill Lake
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Mill Lake
Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.
Electrical Upgrades
Move control cabinet above ground
Replace control panel breaker disconnects
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Move electrical conduit underground
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around dry well
Coat wet well
Install emergency bypass system
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $1,050,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $420,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,470,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Carpenter Hall Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Carpenter Hall Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.
Electrical Upgrades
Label electrical cabinets with line voltage
Repair or replace motor to pump #1
Install disconnect switches for each pump at the bottom of the dry pit.
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Mechanical Upgrades
Replace flow meter
Install emergency bypass system
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair or replace wet well access lid
Repair piping/penetration from dry well to wet well
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Evaluate generator for replacement
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow
Construction Cost 1 $1,200,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $480,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,680,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): De La Torre
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): De La Torre Ci ty
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Recommend minor upgrades as needed to maintain the lift station for existing uses and then full replacement of the lift station to meet future demands. Costs included on this cut sheet are for a full replacement of this lift station but do not include property acquisition if required. Does not include forcemain replacement.
Electrical Upgrades
Install a receptacle and transfer switch for portable electrical generator Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors
Install new control panel above ground
Upgrade Level Controller system
Mechanical Upgrades
Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around lift station
Provide on-site water for wash down
Install emergency bypass system
Coat wet well and recoat the dry well floor
Additional Studies
Perform study to determine if lift station is required to be replaced or is capable of being upsized to meet future demands
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $2,200,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $880,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Vista Nueva Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Vista Nueva Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.
Electrical Upgrades
Seal the conduits leading to the electrical cabinet
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Replace vault cover
Coat wet well
Install emergency overflow tank
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Conduct a study to determine source of moisture into the electrical cabinet City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow
Construction Cost 1 $1,300,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $520,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,820,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Harkins Road
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Harkins Road Ci ty
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Recommend minor upgrades as needed to maintain the lift station for existing uses and then full replacement of the lift station to meet future demands. Costs included on this cut sheet are for a full replacement of this lift station but do not include property acquisition if required. Does not include forcemain replacement.
Electrical Upgrades
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors
Label control panel with line voltage
Install new control panel above ground
Upgrade Level Controller system
Mechanical Upgrades
Replace pumps with smaller pumps when required (NIC)
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around lift station
Provide on-site water for wash down
Install improved emergency bypass system
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $650,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engin eering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $260,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $910,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Las Casitas Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Las Casitas Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.
Electrical Upgrades
Install a receptacle & transfer switch for portable electrical generator Install a new control panel above ground
Repair or replace the breaker disconnects
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install emergency bypass system
Coat bottom of dry well and entire wet well
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $2,500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,000,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,500,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2
Ci ty
Up gr
Ne w
Up gr
Up gr
In su
In su
Ex is
Co ns
Re ha
Re pl
In sp
Ex is
Fu tu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.
Electrical Upgrades
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace splice box in wet well
Install a main breaker with disconnect and disconnects for both pumps on the outside of the cabinet Label the cabinet with the voltage
Install GFI protection for air compressor
Mechanical Upgrades
Investigate vibration issue at 60 Hz. If vibrations persist, lift station upgrades will be required to meet future flows.
Install on-site flow meter
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency bypass system
Install emergency overflow tank
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
The condition of the generator should be evaluated for possible repair or replacement City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $800,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engi neering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $320,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,120,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Airport (Moffett)
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Airport (Moffett) City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.
Electrical Upgrades
Install overloads on load side of contactors for motor protection Replace breaker disconnect handles for pumps 1 and 2 and install proper disconnect hardware Proper labeling for the line voltage on the cabinet and the back-up manual transfer switch lever positions
Provide wiring diagram at station
Replace Sch 40 pipe with proper electrical conduit
Install XP fittings/seals on conduits
Mechanical Upgrades
Replace pumps and motors
Move check valves into a vault located outside of the wet well Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Replace wet well coating
Relocate wet well vent
Provide on-site water for wash down
Determine extent of corrosion on discharge piping and rehabilitate as needed City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas 1. Lake St, Vista Nueva, Carpenter Hall, Santa Rita
2. Spicer, Harkins, TP2, Harris Rd.
Project Components 3. Mill Lake, Las Casitas, Airport
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $410,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $164,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $574,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Controller Upgrades and Standardization
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Controller Upgrades and Standardization
All of the lift stations need new and standardized controllers to improve O&M.
The lift station with the highest priority for controller replacement is Lake Street. Lake St has had a controls failure that lead to an overflow/spill. The next priority lift stations are Vista Nueva, Carpenter Hall, and Santa Rita.
Mill Lake, Las Casitas, and Aiport lift stations are lowest priority because the controllers were replaced relatively recently. However, it has already become difficult to find replacement pieces for these controllers and updates to match the other lift stations will be necessary eventually.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Stations
City of Salinas Emergency Bypass:
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline Washdown Water:
New Gravity Pipeline All Lift Stations
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $200,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $700,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water
Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall, De La Torre, Harkins, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Spicer, TP2
An emergency bypass provides operations' staff the ability to bypass wastewater flows if/when the pumps or power go out at the lift station. Having an emergency bypass would greatly improve operations and maintenance. Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall, De La Torre, Harkins, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Spicer, and TP2 currently do not have emergency bypass capabilities and thus require other means and methods, which often are costly, to pump down the lift stations if there are issues with the pumps or the facility loses power. This CIP will install a new bypass at each of the identified lift station sites.
Wash water is also needed at each of the lift stations and would improve operations. This CIP will install a hose bib connection that would allow operator's to connect a hose for washing hands or down the facility.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Stations
City of Salinas Lake Street, TP2, Vista Nueva
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $600,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $240,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $840,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Some of the lift stations have unsafe configurations for operationsand maintenance. These lift stations put the operators at risk for falls and injuries. This CIP will provide for a technical study to evaluate what safety features can be installed to increase the safety of the operators. This CIP has also provided an assumed construction budget ($200,000 each) to allow for improvements to be installed. This budget will need to be re-evaluated once the technical study has been completed.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas 1. TP2
2. Lake Street
Project Components 3. Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,100,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (30%) $330,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,430,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Generator Replacement
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Generator Replacement
Having a generator onsite at the lift stations is essential in case of an emergency. Some of the generators require replacement. TP2, Lake Street, Santa Rita, and Carpenter Hall will all need generator replacements in the near future.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Stations
City of Salinas De La Torre, Harkins, Vista Nueva
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $600,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (30%) $180,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $780,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Onsite Standby Generator
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Onsite Standby Generator
In case of an emergency having a backup generator at the lift stations is extremely important. The lift stations that do not currently have generators are the goal of this CIP while the ones that need replacement are a seperate CIP. Note the Spicer Lift Station site does not currently have a back up generator, but due to site constraints it will need to remain only using a portable generator.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas 1. Carpenter Hall
2. Harkins Rd, Spicer
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $155,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (25%) $38,750 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $193,750 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Power Receptacle
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Power Receptacle
A power receptacle capable of connecting a portable generator to the lift stations is necessary in case of emergencies. Carpenter Hall is the highest priority because it is the only lift station without a receptacle. The next priority would be the lift stations that have unsafe hook ups that need replacement.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas All Lift Stations
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $900,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (20%) $180,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Painting/Coating Maintenance
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):
Painting/Coating Maintenance
To extend the life of the lift stations and reduce infiltration and inflow (I &I)of additional water into the system, fresh coatings are required. It is prudent to budget for coating the interior of wet wells, piping, underground facilities, etc every few years to extend the life of the facility. This CIP budget is a total dedicated budget to coating but can be spread out over several years.
Future CIP Project: San Juan Grade
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Bolsa Knolls 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $2,370,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $948,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,318,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The San Juan Grade Existing CIP project upsizing approximately 3,800 ft of 8-inch and 10-inch pipe to 12-inch from MH C5- 008 to D4-055. These pipe segments run 33% to 100% full during future peak flow conditions. Ten (10) of the MHs are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the future PHWWF condition.
It should be noted that City maintanence crews have recorded pipe sags and surcharging manholes along pipe segments D5-001 to D4-003 and D4-007 to D4-055.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: San Juan Grade
Future CIP Project: North Davis Rd.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
West Area Specific Plan 74%
Target Area K 14%
Target Area L 4%
Bolsa Knolls 8%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $8,430,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,372,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $11,802,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The North Davis Road Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 240 ft of 18‐inch to 24‐in from MH‐H3‐009 to MH‐H3‐ 013, 1,700 ft. of 24‐inch to 30‐inch from MH‐H3‐013 near Cherokee Dr to MH‐H2‐002 at Calle del Adobe, and 3,400 ft. of 30‐ inch to 32‐inch from MH‐H2‐002 to MH‐J2‐047 at N Davis Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 43‐100% full.
Note: This project assumes Existing Cherokee Drive CIP and Existing Northridge Mall CIP have been constructed.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: North Davis Rd.
Future CIP Project: West Laurel Dr.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Laurel Drive at N. Main Street FGA100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,020,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $408,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,428,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The West Laurel Drive Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 1,550 ft. of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH-H4-001 at N Main St to MH-H3-023 near Laurel Park. Under peak future conditions, this segment on West Laurel Drive runs 66-88% full.
Note: This project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: West Laurel Dr.
Future CIP Project: Victor St.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Laurel Drive at N. Main Street FGA100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,250,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $500,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,750,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Victor Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,600 ft. of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-J3-012 at Ashbury way to MH-J2-007 at W Rossi St. Under peak future conditions, this segment along Victor St runs 73-98% full.
Note: This project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed and Future West Laurel Dr. CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: Victor St.
Future CIP Project: Freedom Pkwy
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Area Specific Plan 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $3,280,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,312,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,592,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Freedom Parkway Future CIP project recommends the upsize of approximately 2,025 ft of 10-inch pipe to 15-inch from MH-J9-005 at Estrella Way to MH-J9-001 at N Sanborn Rd. An additional 2,725 ft of 12-inch pipe from MH-J9-001 to MH-I8-013 at Nogal Dr should be upsized to 18-inch. Under peak future conditions, this segment on Freedom Parkway runs 50-100% full and 8 manholes are surcharging within 5 ft. of the manhole rims.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: Freedom Pkwy
Future CIP Project: Natividad Creek Park
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Area Specific Plan 58%
Central Area Specific Plan 42%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $4,590,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,836,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $6,426,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Natividad Creek Park Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 230 ft of 18‐inch to 21‐inch from MH‐H8‐ 002 to MH‐H8‐004 and approximately 3,800 ft of 24‐inch to 27‐inch from MH‐H8‐004 at Freedom Pkwy to MH‐I7‐005 at the Twin Creeks Golf Course. Under peak future conditions, this segment through Natividad Creek Park runs 76‐100% full.
Note: This project assumes Future Freedom Pkwy CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: Natividad Creek Park
Future CIP Project: East Alisal St.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $5,780,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,312,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,092,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The East Alisal Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 5,400 ft. of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-M8- 010 near Bardin Rd to MH-M7-009 at Williams Rd. Additionally, approximately 2,200 ft of 18-inch should be upsized to 21- inch from MH-M7-009 to MH-M6-012 at N Sanborn Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 67-100% full and 14 manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rims.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: East Alisal St.
Future CIP Project: Abbott St.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 32%
Target Area B 21%
Target Area F 1%
Salinas Ag‐Industrial Center 46%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost 1 $1,920,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $768,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,688,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Abbot Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,300 ft of 12‐inch to 15‐inch from MH‐Q7‐001 at Harris Rd to MH‐Q7‐004. Between MH Q7‐004 and P6‐015, there is an exisitng 15‐inch pipe that does not need to be upsized. An additional 850 ft. of 12‐inch pipe from MH‐P6‐015 to MH‐P6‐006 at Harkins Rd should be upsized to 15‐inch, and 700 ft of 15‐inch to 18‐inch from MH‐P6‐006 to the manhole after P6‐003 (no City ID). Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66‐100% full. Under future max day flows seven of the manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: Abbott St.
Future CIP Project: South Sanborn Rd.
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $5,980,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,392,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,372,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
In order to avoid upgrades at both South Sanborn and downstream of TP2, the South Sanborn Future CIP project proposes to increase the overflow elevation at MH-M6-012 to 65.09 ft in elevation (an additional 0.65 ft from Existing CIP Upstream TP2 Diversion). This hydraulic change would send future flows primarily down South Sanborn Road. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full and MH-N6-004 is surcharging. This project proposes to upsize approximately 4,365 ft of 18-inch to 21-inch from MH-M6-012 at E Alisal St to MH-O6-006 at Pellet Ave, 500 ft of 21-inch to 24-inch from MH O6-006 to MH O6-008 at Industrial St, and 1,500 ft of 24-inch to 27-inch from MH-O6-008 to MH-05-002 near Abbott St.
It should be noted that there is concrete "weir" at MH N6-003 to stop South Sanborn Rd. flows from backing into Mayfair Dr. Detailed design for this project should consider raising the slope/invert on Mayfair Dr or increasing the slope along South Sanborn to prevent further backwater effects.
Note: This project assumes Future East Alisal CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.
1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.
Future CIP Project: South Sanborn Rd.